Open AccessComparison of Patient Satisfaction between Spinal versus General Anaesthesia for Lumbar Disc Surgery
Author(s) -
Monowar Hossain Talukder,
Mainuddin Ahmed,
Khondaker Shaheen Hossain,
Md Belal Uddin,
Shohana Shikder,
Faruk Ahmed
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
scholars journal of applied medical sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2347-954X
pISSN - 2320-6691
DOI - 10.36347/sjams.2022.v10i03.014
Subject(s) - medicine , anesthesia , perioperative , visual analogue scale , general anaesthesia , atelectasis , lumbar , surgery , patient satisfaction , vomiting , postoperative nausea and vomiting , lung
Background: Lumbar discectomy is most commonly performed under general anaesthesia, which can be associated with several perioperative morbidities including nausea, vomiting, atelectasis, pulmonary aspiration, and prolonged post-anaesthesia recovery. It is possible that fewer complications may occur if the procedure is performed under spinal anesthesia. Objective: To assess the Patient Satisfaction between Spinal versus General Anaesthesia in Patients for Prolapse Lumbar Intervertebral Disc (PLID) Surgery. Methods: A Comparative study was carried out at the Dept. of Anesthesia, Abdul Malek Ukil Medical College & Hospital, Noakhali, Bangladesh from January 2018 to December 2020. One hundred (100) healthy and co-operative patients ASA I-II were recruited and randomized into two equal groups, with half of these patients receiving spinal anaesthesia (n-50) and the remainder general anaesthesia (n-50). A comprehensive postoperative evaluation was carried out documenting any anaesthetic complications, pace of physiological and functional recovery and patient satisfaction. Variables were recorded as pain level using a visual analogue scale (VAS) at 1, 6, 12 and 24 hours; patient level of satisfaction during the stay on the ward using verbal rating scale (VRS) as it was detected by A p-value < 0.05 were considered as significant. Results: In our study Spinal anaesthesia patients achieved the milestones of physiological and functional recovery more rapidly and reported less postoperative pain. Perioperative hypotension in 26% of patients and none was hypertensive in spinal group and in G/A Group 06% of patients was hypotensive and 20% were hypertensive. Postoperative pain intensity more in G/A group than spinal group. Patient satisfaction in spinal group was more comparative to G/A group. Conclusion: In conclusion, Spinal anesthesia is a reasonable alternative to general anesthesia for the patients with ASA grade I/II and preferably single level pathology in the lumbar