RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The learning-curve cumulative sum method (LC-CUSUM) and its risk-adjusted form (RA-LC-CUSUM) have been proposed as performance-monitoring methods to assess competency during the learning phase of procedural skills. However, scarce data exist about the method's accuracy. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of LC-CUSUM forms using historical data consisting of sequences of successes and failures in brachial plexus blocks (BPBs) performed by anesthesia residents. METHODS: Using historical data from 1713 BPB performed by 32 anesthesia residents, individual learning curves were constructed using the LC-CUSUM and RA-LC-CUSUM methods. A multilevel logistic regression model predicted the procedure-specific risk of failure incorporated in the RA-LC-CUSUM calculations. Competency was defined as a maximum 15% cumulative failure rate and was used as the reference for determining the accuracy of both methods. RESULTS: According to the LC-CUSUM method, 22 residents (84.61%) attained competency after a median of 18.5 blocks (interquartile range [IQR], 14-23), while the RA-LC-CUSUM assigned competency to 20 residents (76.92%) after a median of 17.5 blocks (IQR, 14-25, P = .001). The median failure rate at reaching competency was 6.5% (4%-9.75%) under the LC-CUSUM and 6.5% (4%-9%) for the RA-LC-CUSUM method ( P = .37). The sensitivity of the LC-CUSUM (85%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-98%) was similar to the RA-LC-CUSUM method (77%; 95% CI, 61%-93%; P = .15). Identical specificity values were found for both methods (67%; 95% CI, 29%-100%, P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: The LC-CUSUM and RA-LC-CUSUM methods were associated with substantial false-positive and false-negative rates. Also, small lower limits for the 95% CIs around the accuracy measures were observed, indicating that the methods may be inaccurate for high-stakes decisions about resident competency at BPBs.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Objectives: This study compares Endovenous Laser Ablation (EVLA) alone versus combined with ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) for Great Saphenous Vein (GSV) insufficiency. Methods: Sixty patients were randomly allocated to EVLA or EVLA-UGFS groups which focused on GSV occlusion rates, complications, additional treatments, and quality of life (QoL) changes. Results: Among 55 participants, the EVLA group had higher 12-month occlusion rates (92.3% vs. 75.8%, p = 0.11). Nervous injury (NI) was rarer in EVLA-UGFS (3.4% vs. 23.1%, p = 0.04). No significant difference in other complication rates (p > 0.05). QoL improved in both groups (p < 0.001). EVLA-UGFS required more subsequent procedures (24.1% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.03). Conclusions: EVLA and EVLA-UGFS effectively treat GSV insufficiency, enhancing QoL. The combined method reduces NI risk but may require more follow-up procedures.

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the learning curves of peribulbar anesthesia and estimate the number of blocks needed to attain proficiency. METHODS: Anonymized records of sequential peribulbar blocks performed by first-year anesthesia residents were analyzed. The block sequential number and the outcomes were extracted from each record. Success was defined as a complete sensory and motor block of the eye, and failure was defined as an incomplete block requiring supplemental local anesthetic injections or general anesthesia. Learning curves using the LC-CUSUM method were constructed, aiming for acceptable and unacceptable failure rates of 10% and 20%, and 10% probability of type I and II errors. Simulations were used to determine the proficiency limit h0. Residents whose curves reached h0 were considered proficient. The Sequential Probability Ratio Test Cumulative Sum Method (SPRT-CUSUM) was used for follow-up. RESULTS: Thirty-nine residents performed 2076 blocks (median = 52 blocks per resident; Interquartile Range (IQR) [range] = 27-78 [4-132]). Thirty residents (77%) achieved proficiency after a median of 13 blocks (13-24 [13-24]). CONCLUSIONS: The LC-CUSUM is a robust method for detecting resident proficiency at peribulbar anesthesia, defined as success rates exceeding 90%. Accordingly, 13 to 24 supervised double-injection peribulbar blocks are needed to attain competence at peribulbar anesthesia.

Assuntos

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Conflicting evidence exists on the choice of surgical or non-surgical treatment of flail chest injuries. We aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing outcomes in patients presenting flail chest undergoing surgical or non-surgical treatment. METHODS: Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing surgery to no surgery in patients with acute unstable chest wall injuries. We computed weighted mean differences (WMDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for binary endpoints, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Random effects meta-analyses were performed. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics. RESULTS: Six RCTs (544 patients) were included, and surgical treatment was used in 269 (49.4%). Compared to no surgery, surgery reduced mechanical ventilation days (WMD - 4.34, 95% CI - 6.98, - 1.69; p < 0.01; I2 = 87%; GRADE: very low; PI - 13.51, 4.84); length of intensive care unit stay (WMD - 4.62, 95% CI - 7.19, - 2.05; p < 0.01; I2 = 78%; GRADE: low; PI - 12.86, 3.61) and the incidence of pneumonia (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.31, 0.81; p = 0.005; I2 = 54%; GRADE: moderate; PI 0.13, 1.91). No difference in mortality (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.19, 1.65; p = 0.27; I2 = 23%; GRADE: moderate; PI 0.04, 7.25), length of hospital stay (WMD - 5.39, 95% CI - 11.38, - 0.60; p = 0.08; I2 = 89%; GRADE: very low; PI - 11.38, 0.60), or need for tracheostomy (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.34, 1.03; p = 0.06; I2 = 54%; GRADE: moderate; PI 0.11, 3.24) was found. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that surgical treatment is advantageous compared to non-surgical treatment for patients with flail chest secondary to rib fractures.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the efficacy of epidurally administered magnesium associated with local anesthetics on postoperative pain control. METHODS: The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO as CRD42021231910. Literature searches were conducted on Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and Web of Science for randomized controlled trials comparing epidural administration of magnesium added to local anesthetics for postoperative pain in elective surgical adult patients. Primary outcomes were the time to the first Postoperative (PO) Analgesic Request (TFAR), 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores at the first six and 24 postoperative hours. Secondary outcomes included Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting (PONV), pruritus, and shivering. Quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE criteria. RESULTS: Seventeen studies comparing epidural were included. Effect estimates are described as weighted Mean Differences (MD) and 95% Confidence Intervals (95% CI) for the main outcomes: TFAR (MD = 72.4 min; 95% CI = 10.22-134.58 min; p < 0.001; I2 = 99.8%; GRADE: very low); opioid consumption (MD = -7.2 mg (95% CI = -9.30 - -5.09; p < 0.001; I2 = 98%; GRADE: very low). VAS pain scores within the first six PO hours (VAS) (MD = -1.01 cm; 95% CI = -1.40-0.64 cm; p < 0.001; I2 = 88%; GRADE: very low), at 24 hours (MD = -0.56 cm; 95% CI = -1.14-0.01 cm; p = 0.05; I2 = 97%; GRADE: very low). CONCLUSIONS: Magnesium sulfate delayed TFAR and decreased 24-hour opioid consumption and early postoperative pain intensity. However, imprecision and inconsistency pervaded meta-analyses, causing very low certainty of effect estimates.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of duloxetine when added to a multimodal analgesia regimen on posthemorrhoidectomy pain, opioid consumption, and side effects. METHODS: Prospective, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial. This study included 62 patients who underwent hemorrhoidectomy. The patients were randomly assigned to receive oral duloxetine 60 mg or placebo 2 h before and 24 h after surgery. The primary outcomes were pain intensity - measured on an 11-point visual analog pain scale - and cumulative morphine consumption at 12, 24, and 48 postoperative hours. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients completed the study (25 in the duloxetine group and 27 in the placebo group). Pain scores did not differ between duloxetine and placebo: 4.5; 3.0 - 7.0 vs. 5.0; 3.5 - 7.0, p = 0.68 at 12 h, 3.0; 2.0 - 5.0 vs. 3.0; 2.0 - 5.0, p = 0.56 at 24 h, and 2.5; 1.75 - 3.75 vs. 1.5; 0.5 - 3, p = 0.08 at 48 h. Further, cumulative morphine consumption did not differ between the duloxetine and placebo groups: 4; 1.25 - 10.75 mg vs. 7; 1.0 - 12.0 mg, p = 0.68 at 12 h, 9.5; 2.0 - 17.5 mg vs. 8.0; 4.0 - 18.0 mg; p = 0.80 at 24 h, and 11.0; 2.0 - 27.0 mg vs. 10; 4.0 - 24.0 mg, p = 0.78 at 48 h. Side effects did not differ between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with placebo, duloxetine did not decrease pain intensity or morphine consumption during the first 48 h postoperatively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was retrospectively registered on the Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (identifier: RBR-9pdgms, registration date: 08/10/2020).

Assuntos

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Proficiency in needle-to-ultrasound beam alignment and accurate approach to structures are pivotal for ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia. This study evaluated the effects of high-frequency, structured expert feedback on simulation training of such abilities. METHODS: Forty-two subjects randomly allocated as controls or intervention participated in two 25-trial experiments. Experiment 1 consisted of inserting a needle into a bovine muscular phantom parallel to the ultrasound beam while maintaining full imaging of the needle. In experiment 2, the needle aimed to contact a target inside the phantom. Intervention subjects received structured feedback between trials. Controls received a global critique after completing the trials. The slopes of the learning curves derived from the sequences of successes and failures were compared. Change-point analyses identified the start and the end of learning in trial sequences. The number of trials associated with learning, the number of technical errors, and the duration of training sessions were compared between intervention and controls. RESULTS: In experiment 1, learning curves departed from 73% (controls) and 76% (intervention) success rates; slopes (standard error) were 0.79% (0.02%) and 0.71% (0.04), respectively, with mean absolute difference of 0.18% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.17%-0.19%; P = 0). Intervention subjects' learning curves were shorter and steeper than those of controls. In experiment 2, the learning curves departed from 43% (controls) and 80% (intervention) success rates; slopes (standard error) were 1.06% (0.02%) and 0.42% (0.03%), respectively, with a mean difference of 0.65% (95% CI, 0.64%-0.66%; P = 0). Feedback was associated with a greater number of trials associated with learning in both experiment 1 (mean difference, 1.55 trials; 95% CI, 0.15-3 trials; P = 0) and experiment 2 (mean difference, 4.25 trials; 95% CI, 1.47-7.03 trials; P = 0) and a lower number of technical errors per trial in experiments 1 (mean difference, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.07-0.30; P = .02) and 2 (mean difference, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.45-0.70; P = 0), but longer training sessions in both experiments 1 (mean difference, 9.2 minutes; 95% CI, 4.15-14.24 minutes; P = .01) and 2 (mean difference, 7.4 minutes; 95% CI, 1.17-13.59 minutes; P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: High-frequency, structured expert feedback compared favorably to self-directed learning, being associated with shorter learning curves, smaller number of technical errors, and longer duration of in-training improvement, but increased duration of the training sessions.

Assuntos

Assuntos

Assuntos