Anesthesiology
Alireza Talai; Alireza Moslem; Arash Hamzahee; Mojtaba Kianmehr; Abbasali Abbasnezhad
Volume 27, Issue 1 , May and June 2020, , Pages 1-8
Abstract
Background: Intravenous regional anesthesia is a technique developed by the use of tourniquet and intravenous injection of anesthetic drug in the distal areas of the surgical region of the limbs. The aim of this study was to compare the onset of anesthesia induced by two methods of lidocaine use in regional ...
Read More
Background: Intravenous regional anesthesia is a technique developed by the use of tourniquet and intravenous injection of anesthetic drug in the distal areas of the surgical region of the limbs. The aim of this study was to compare the onset of anesthesia induced by two methods of lidocaine use in regional intravenous anesthesia of the upper extremity.Materials and Methods: This single-blind clinical trial study was performed on 40 patients who referred to Bohlool hospital in Gonabad for forearm surgery. Samples were randomly divided into two receiving 40 ml lidocaine 0.5% and 20 ml lidocaine 1%. The research tool was a Researcher-made checklist and a Visual Analoge Scale (VAS). Fisher's exact test, independent and pair t-test were used for data analysis at a significance level of less than 0.05.Results: The results showed that the interval between the injection of anesthesia until the start of complete anesthesia was significantly shorter in the 20 ml lidocaine 1% recipient group compared to the 40 ml lidocaine 0.5% recipient group (p0.05).Conclusion: Regional intravenous anesthesia is induced by 20 ml lidocaine 1% faster than 40 ml lidocaine 0.5%.Keywords: Lidocaine, Intravenous, Regional anesthesia, Upper extremity
Nursing
Ali Saneipour; mojtaba rad; Yaser Tabaraei; Mostafa Rad
Volume 26, Issue 3 , September and October 2019, , Pages 373-381
Abstract
Background: Ischemic heart disease is the first cause of early death in the world. One of the main treatments for patients with acute coronary syndrome is the use of anticoagulants. The aim of this study, The aim of this study was to compare effect of two methods of intermittent intravenous injection ...
Read More
Background: Ischemic heart disease is the first cause of early death in the world. One of the main treatments for patients with acute coronary syndrome is the use of anticoagulants. The aim of this study, The aim of this study was to compare effect of two methods of intermittent intravenous injection and continuous infusion on APTT in patients with ACS.Materials and Methods: clinical trial was performed on 60 patients selected by random sampling in Neishabour Hospital in 2018. To data gathering were used the demographic information questionnaire, and APTT checklist. The intravenous injection group received 2500 units heparin every 3 hours and infusion group was given 1000 units per hour and APTT was controlled. Data analysis was done using SPSS-16 software and sinifiant level was considered to be less than 0.05.Results: Mean APTT level in first stage was 40.8 ± 11.17 and 38.87 ± 8.86 in intermittent intravenous injection and continuous infusion groups respectively. In the 8th stage, mean APTT level in intravenous injection group was 55.03 ± 8.41 and in continuous infusion group was 55.7 ± 14.09. Independent t-test did not show a significant difference between the two groups (P> 0.05).Conclusion: Regarding to approximation of the results in two methods, alternate injection method can be used instead of continuous intravenous infusion. This method creates less constraints for the patient and reduces the burden on nurses due to don’t need setting pump syringe, serum heparin preparation, and alleviation of alarms.