Search

Introduction Pectus excavatum repair is associated with substantial postoperative pain, despite the use of epidural analgesia and other analgesic regimens. Perioperative recorded music interventions have been shown to alleviate pain and anxiety in adults, but evidence for children and adolescents is still lacking. This study protocol describes a randomised controlled trial that evaluates the effects of recorded music interventions on postoperative pain relief in children and adolescents after pectus excavatum repair.Methods A multicentre randomised controlled trial was set up comparing the effects of perioperative recorded music interventions in addition to standard care with those of standard care only in patients undergoing a Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum repair. One hundred and seventy subjects (12–18 years of age) will be included in three centres in the Netherlands. Patient inclusion has started in November 2018, and is ongoing. The primary outcome is self-reported perceived pain measured on the visual analogue scale. Secondary outcomes are anxiety level, analgesics consumption, vital parameters such as heart rate, blood pressure and respiratory rate, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, quality of life and cost-effectiveness.Ethics and dissemination This study is being conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The Medical Ethics Review Board of Erasmus University Medical Centre Rotterdam, The Netherlands, has approved this protocol. Results will be disseminated via peer-reviewed scientific journals and conference presentations.Trial registration number NL6863

Background and Objectives: Learning epidural anesthesia traditionally involves bedside teaching. Visualization aids or a simulator can help in acquiring motor skills, increasing patient safety and steepening the learning curve. We evaluated the face and construct validity of the TU-Delft Epidural Simulator and the effect of needle visualization.Methods: Sixty-eight anesthesiologists, anesthesia residents, and final-year medical students tested the epidural simulator. Participants performed six epidural simulations with and six without needle visualization. We tested face validity on a Likert scale questionnaire. We collected data with the simulator software (spinal taps, dura contacts, bone contacts, attempts, and time) and tested for correlation with the performer's experience (construct validity). A visualization aid was tested in a randomized crossover design.Results: Face validity as rated by the participants was above average, with a mean of 3.7 (2.0-4.8) on a 5-point scale. Construct validity was indicated by significantly more spinal taps (0.4 [0-4) vs 0.07 [0-2], p=0.04) and more dura contacts (0.58 [0-6] vs 0.37 [0-3], p=0.002) by the inexperienced group compared with the expert group. The visualization aid improved performance by reducing the number of bone contacts and the number of attempts, and by decreasing the procedure time. Prior visualization training reduced the total procedure time from 279 s (69-574) to 180 s (53-605) (p=0.01) for the "blind" procedure.Conclusions: The TU-Delft Epidural Simulator is a useful tool for teaching motor skills during epidural needle placement. Prior use of a visualization tool improves performance even without visual support during consequent simulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]