比利时区域麻醉的实践——一项全国性调查

IF 0.1 Q4 ANESTHESIOLOGY Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica Pub Date : 2021-06-01 DOI:10.56126/72.2.5
P. Goffin, J. Lecoq, L. Sermeus
{"title":"比利时区域麻醉的实践——一项全国性调查","authors":"P. Goffin, J. Lecoq, L. Sermeus","doi":"10.56126/72.2.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : National surveys are useful to assess the state of regional anaesthesia (RA) practice in a particular country. Given that such information was lacking in Belgium, we conducted a survey to evaluate the Belgian practice of peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) with a particular focus on its safety aspects.\n\nMethods : A survey was sent by email to 1510 Belgian anesthesiologists. No identifying information was collected. Data were collected between September 2019 and October 2019.\n\nResults : We collected 324 questionnaires (response rate 21%). Eighty five percent of respondents perform regularly PNB. 99% place a venous access before performing a block, and more than 90% monitor patients with minimum peripheral pulse oximetry.\nThe majority monitor patients for a minimum of 30 minutes after the injection of local anesthetic (LA). Ultrasound-guided technique for RA is used by 89% of respondents. Neurostimulation is totally abandoned by 20% of them. Monitoring of injection pressures is performed by 21% of respondents. More than 50% of respondents use sterile gloves, surgical drapes and a mask. With regards to the solution of LA used, 52% of respondents never mix LAs. An adjuvant is always used by 15% of the respondents while 10% of them never use them.\n\nConclusions : This survey suggests that the practice of PNBs in Belgium is in line with the current international guidelines. This survey can serve as a benchmark for future evaluation and comparison between RA techniques. These observations should be taken into account for the implementation of national guidelines and therefore for the improvement of safety in the practice of PNBs.","PeriodicalId":7024,"journal":{"name":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The practice of regional anesthesia in Belgium – a national survey\",\"authors\":\"P. Goffin, J. Lecoq, L. Sermeus\",\"doi\":\"10.56126/72.2.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background : National surveys are useful to assess the state of regional anaesthesia (RA) practice in a particular country. Given that such information was lacking in Belgium, we conducted a survey to evaluate the Belgian practice of peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) with a particular focus on its safety aspects.\\n\\nMethods : A survey was sent by email to 1510 Belgian anesthesiologists. No identifying information was collected. Data were collected between September 2019 and October 2019.\\n\\nResults : We collected 324 questionnaires (response rate 21%). Eighty five percent of respondents perform regularly PNB. 99% place a venous access before performing a block, and more than 90% monitor patients with minimum peripheral pulse oximetry.\\nThe majority monitor patients for a minimum of 30 minutes after the injection of local anesthetic (LA). Ultrasound-guided technique for RA is used by 89% of respondents. Neurostimulation is totally abandoned by 20% of them. Monitoring of injection pressures is performed by 21% of respondents. More than 50% of respondents use sterile gloves, surgical drapes and a mask. With regards to the solution of LA used, 52% of respondents never mix LAs. An adjuvant is always used by 15% of the respondents while 10% of them never use them.\\n\\nConclusions : This survey suggests that the practice of PNBs in Belgium is in line with the current international guidelines. This survey can serve as a benchmark for future evaluation and comparison between RA techniques. These observations should be taken into account for the implementation of national guidelines and therefore for the improvement of safety in the practice of PNBs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":7024,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.56126/72.2.5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta anaesthesiologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56126/72.2.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:国家调查有助于评估特定国家的区域麻醉(RA)实践状况。鉴于比利时缺乏此类信息,我们进行了一项调查,以评估比利时周围神经阻滞(pnb)的实践,特别关注其安全性方面。方法:通过电子邮件对1510名比利时麻醉师进行调查。没有收集任何身份信息。数据收集于2019年9月至2019年10月。结果:共收集问卷324份,回复率21%。85%的受访者定期执行PNB。99%的患者在进行静脉阻塞前放置静脉通道,90%以上的患者使用最低外周脉搏血氧仪监测患者。大多数在注射局麻药(LA)后至少监测患者30分钟。89%的应答者使用超声引导技术治疗RA。20%的人完全放弃了神经刺激。21%的受访者对注入压力进行了监测。50%以上的答复者使用无菌手套、手术纱布和口罩。对于使用的LA解决方案,52%的受访者从不混合使用LA。15%的受访者总是使用佐剂,而10%的受访者从不使用佐剂。结论:该调查表明,比利时的pnb实践符合当前的国际准则。这项调查可以作为未来评估和比较RA技术的基准。在实施国家指导方针时应考虑到这些观察结果,从而提高pnb实践的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The practice of regional anesthesia in Belgium – a national survey
Background : National surveys are useful to assess the state of regional anaesthesia (RA) practice in a particular country. Given that such information was lacking in Belgium, we conducted a survey to evaluate the Belgian practice of peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs) with a particular focus on its safety aspects. Methods : A survey was sent by email to 1510 Belgian anesthesiologists. No identifying information was collected. Data were collected between September 2019 and October 2019. Results : We collected 324 questionnaires (response rate 21%). Eighty five percent of respondents perform regularly PNB. 99% place a venous access before performing a block, and more than 90% monitor patients with minimum peripheral pulse oximetry. The majority monitor patients for a minimum of 30 minutes after the injection of local anesthetic (LA). Ultrasound-guided technique for RA is used by 89% of respondents. Neurostimulation is totally abandoned by 20% of them. Monitoring of injection pressures is performed by 21% of respondents. More than 50% of respondents use sterile gloves, surgical drapes and a mask. With regards to the solution of LA used, 52% of respondents never mix LAs. An adjuvant is always used by 15% of the respondents while 10% of them never use them. Conclusions : This survey suggests that the practice of PNBs in Belgium is in line with the current international guidelines. This survey can serve as a benchmark for future evaluation and comparison between RA techniques. These observations should be taken into account for the implementation of national guidelines and therefore for the improvement of safety in the practice of PNBs.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
期刊介绍: L’Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica est le journal de la SBAR, publié 4 fois par an. L’Acta a été publié pour la première fois en 1950. Depuis 1973 l’Acta est publié dans la langue Anglaise, ce qui a été résulté à un rayonnement plus internationaux. Depuis lors l’Acta est devenu un journal à ne pas manquer dans le domaine d’Anesthésie Belge, offrant e.a. les textes du congrès annuel, les Research Meetings, … Vous en trouvez aussi les dates des Research Meetings, du congrès annuel et des autres réunions.
期刊最新文献
Long-term cognitive dysfunction after COVID ARDS Trends in female authorship in Acta Anaesthesiologica Belgica from 2005 to 2021 General anesthesia for maternal surgery during pregnancy: dogmas, myths and evidence, a narrative review Clinical relevance of nocebo effects in anesthesia practice: a narrative review Gender equality and equity in anaesthesia research: Why are we still talking about numbers?
×
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