Comparison of pain and discomfort in supine and lateral positions after surgery for lumbar degenerative disease: A prospective randomized controlled study

Yasuchika Aoki , Makoto Suzuki , Hiroshi Takahashi , Arata Nakajima , Masato Sonobe , Toshiaki Kotani , Takayuki Nakajima , Yusuke Sato , Masahiro Inoue , Junya Saito , Masaki Norimoto , Yawara Eguchi , Sumihisa Orita , Seiji Ohtori , Koichi Nakagawa
{"title":"Comparison of pain and discomfort in supine and lateral positions after surgery for lumbar degenerative disease: A prospective randomized controlled study","authors":"Yasuchika Aoki ,&nbsp;Makoto Suzuki ,&nbsp;Hiroshi Takahashi ,&nbsp;Arata Nakajima ,&nbsp;Masato Sonobe ,&nbsp;Toshiaki Kotani ,&nbsp;Takayuki Nakajima ,&nbsp;Yusuke Sato ,&nbsp;Masahiro Inoue ,&nbsp;Junya Saito ,&nbsp;Masaki Norimoto ,&nbsp;Yawara Eguchi ,&nbsp;Sumihisa Orita ,&nbsp;Seiji Ohtori ,&nbsp;Koichi Nakagawa","doi":"10.1016/j.ijotn.2022.100959","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>To compare postoperative pain and discomfort between supine and lateral positions after lumbar surgery, a prospective randomized controlled study was performed.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Forty-three patients with lumbar degenerative disease<span>, treated by decompression (n = 23) or fusion surgery (n = 20), were randomly assigned to be placed in either the supine (supine group: n = 21) or lateral (lateral group: n = 22) position postoperatively, and asked to maintain their position until a day after the surgery. Postoperative back pain and discomfort (visual analog scale [VAS], 0–100 mm) and the number of patients who could maintain their position were examined.</span></p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The VAS scores for back pain (<u>supine</u>: 64.9 ± 22.0, <u>lateral:</u> 55.7 ± 21.4) showed no significant difference between the positions. However, the supine group showed significantly more severe discomfort (75.6 ± 15.7) than the lateral group (64.9 ± 15.7, p = 0.039). Significantly fewer patients maintained their position in the supine group (28.2%) than in the lateral group (68.2%; p = 0.022). Among patients who underwent fusion surgery, significantly fewer patients maintained their position in the supine group (10.0%) than those in the lateral group (60.0%, p = 0.029).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Postoperative discomfort was significantly reduced in the lateral position than in the supine position; thus, the lateral position is more suitable after lumbar surgery in terms of postoperative discomfort.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":45099,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Orthopaedic and Trauma Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Orthopaedic and Trauma Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1878124122000399","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Introduction

To compare postoperative pain and discomfort between supine and lateral positions after lumbar surgery, a prospective randomized controlled study was performed.

Methods

Forty-three patients with lumbar degenerative disease, treated by decompression (n = 23) or fusion surgery (n = 20), were randomly assigned to be placed in either the supine (supine group: n = 21) or lateral (lateral group: n = 22) position postoperatively, and asked to maintain their position until a day after the surgery. Postoperative back pain and discomfort (visual analog scale [VAS], 0–100 mm) and the number of patients who could maintain their position were examined.

Results

The VAS scores for back pain (supine: 64.9 ± 22.0, lateral: 55.7 ± 21.4) showed no significant difference between the positions. However, the supine group showed significantly more severe discomfort (75.6 ± 15.7) than the lateral group (64.9 ± 15.7, p = 0.039). Significantly fewer patients maintained their position in the supine group (28.2%) than in the lateral group (68.2%; p = 0.022). Among patients who underwent fusion surgery, significantly fewer patients maintained their position in the supine group (10.0%) than those in the lateral group (60.0%, p = 0.029).

Conclusion

Postoperative discomfort was significantly reduced in the lateral position than in the supine position; thus, the lateral position is more suitable after lumbar surgery in terms of postoperative discomfort.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腰椎退行性疾病手术后仰卧位和侧卧位疼痛和不适的比较:一项前瞻性随机对照研究
为了比较腰椎手术后仰卧位和侧卧位的术后疼痛和不适,进行了一项前瞻性随机对照研究。方法43例腰椎退行性疾病患者均行减压手术(n = 23)或融合手术(n = 20),术后随机分为仰卧位(仰卧位组:n = 21)和侧卧位(侧卧位组:n = 22)两组,并保持该体位至术后1天。检查术后背部疼痛和不适(视觉模拟量表[VAS], 0 ~ 100 mm)及能保持体位的患者人数。结果两组患者背部疼痛VAS评分(仰卧位:64.9±22.0,侧卧位:55.7±21.4)差异无统计学意义。仰卧位组(75.6±15.7)明显高于侧卧位组(64.9±15.7,p = 0.039)。仰卧位组(28.2%)明显少于侧卧位组(68.2%);p = 0.022)。在接受融合手术的患者中,仰卧位组保持体位的患者(10.0%)明显少于侧卧位组(60.0%,p = 0.029)。结论侧卧位术后不适感较仰卧位明显减轻;因此,就术后不适而言,侧卧位更适合腰椎手术后。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Current status of postoperative care for elderly osteoporotic fracture patients in Jiangsu Province, China: A multicenter cross-sectional study Corrigendum to "The effectiveness of prophylactic closed incision negative pressure wound therapy compared to conventional dressings in the prevention of periprosthetic joint infection post hip and knee revision arthroplasty surgery: A systematic review" [Int. J. Orthopaed. Trauma Nurs. 53 (2024) 101048]. LITERATURE REVIEWS – The effect of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) on bone healing and tissue regeneration Health literacy of older adults with musculoskeletal problems: A systematic review Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1