Search

Background: Post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common and distressing complication after anaesthesia and surgery. The present study was conducted to determine the effect of dextrose in LC patients in preventing PONV. Materials & Methods: The present study was conducted on 200 patients of both genders. All were selected for LC under general anesthesia. They were divided into 2 groups. Group I patients received an infusion of 500 cc lactated Ringer's solution and group II received 5% dextrose in lactated Ringer's solution over a period of 30 min. All patients rated their nausea and vomiting intensity using the verbal rating scale immediately at postanaesthesia care unit arrival; 60 and 120 min after arriving at the PACU and 12 and 24 h after surgery. Results: Nausea score at 60 minutes (N1) was 1 in group II and 5.2 in group I, N2 was 0.86 in group II and 4.2 in group I, N3 was 1.24 in group II and 2.84 in group I and N4 was 0.2 in group II and 0.1 in group I. The difference was significant (P< 0.05). Vomiting score T1 was 5.26 in group I and 1 in group II, T2 was 1.32 in group I and 0.63 in group II, T3 was 2.48 in group I and 1.24 in group II and T4 was 1.42 in group I and 0.82 in group II. The difference was statistically significant (P< 0.05). Conclusion: Author found that administration of IV dextrose before anaesthesia induction may be recommended as an effective and safe method for the prophylaxis of PONV after LC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Evaluating the errors helps us to learn, identify and solve a major problem in health care systems, also this systematic approach does not intend to punish or blame individual personnel. The present study was conducted to assess incident reporting in post operative patients. Materials & Methods: The present study was conducted in the department of Anesthesia. It comprised of 2430 patients of both genders. A proforma was developed which included information about the type of incident, severity of incident, person responsible. Whenever an incident was identified, a proforma was filled. Results: Out of 2430 patients, males were 1280 and females were 1150. The difference was non- significant (P- 0.1). Type of incidents were human errors which includes orders not written (7), wrong documentations (8), underdosage (3) and improper patient selection (4). In equipment selection, pump malfunctions (10), battery problem (12) and in patient factors, patient unable to push PCIA handset was seen (8). The difference was significant (P< 0.05). Factors responsible for incidents were inattentional (54%), lack of knowledge (18%), lack of cooperation (12%) and inadequate communication (26%). The difference was significant (P< 0.05). Conclusion: Incident reporting proved to be a effective method of improving quality care in patients. It not only provides valuable information about areas which needed improvement but also guides to take steps to avoid it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]