RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Proximal femoral fractures are a major public health problem because of the increasing proportion of elderly individuals in the general population. The mode of choice for anaesthesia in surgical treatment of these fractures is still debated in terms of better postoperative outcome. The aim of our study was to compare the effect of general over spinal anaesthesia on mortality in proximal femoral fracture surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study was a retrospective analysis of 115 patients aged at least 70 years who underwent surgery for proximal femoral fracture. The survey was conducted from 1 January to 31 December 2015 at the General Hospital Karlovac, Croatia. Patients were divided into two groups: group 1 - general anaesthesia and group 2 - spinal anaesthesia. The primary outcome measure was the effect of mode of anaesthesia, general versus spinal, on mortality within 30 days, six months and one year after surgery. RESULTS: General anaesthesia (EndoTracheal Anaesthesia) was administered in 77 patients (67%; group I - ETA) and spinal anaesthesia in 38 patients (33%; group 2 - SPIN). Both groups had more female than male patients: 69 patients (89.6%) in the ETA group and 32 patients (84.2%) in the SPIN group were female. The mean age in the ETA group was 82.91 years and in the SPIN group was 80.18 years. ASA II status was more common in patients in the SPIN group (25 patients [65.8%]). The average time from hospitalisation to surgery was 53.44 hours in the ETA group and 53.33 hours in the SPIN group. There was no significant difference between groups in the number of comorbidities, or intraoperative and postoperative complications. There was no statistically significant difference in mortality between the groups. Mortality after surgery in the ETA and SPIN groups, respectively, was as follows: 10.4% and 10.5% at 30 days, 23.4% and 15.8% at six months, and 32.5% and 31.6% at one year. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that the mode of anaesthesia (general vs spinal) has no effect on postoperative mortality, and that the mode of anaesthesia should be applied on an individual basis in correlation with associated comorbidities.
Asunto(s)
Anestesia General , Anestesia Raquidea , Fracturas del Fémur/cirugía , Fijación Intramedular de Fracturas/métodos , Fracturas de Cadera/cirugía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/mortalidad , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Anestesia General/mortalidad , Anestesia Raquidea/mortalidad , Comorbilidad , Femenino , Fracturas del Fémur/mortalidad , Fijación Intramedular de Fracturas/mortalidad , Fracturas de Cadera/mortalidad , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Humanos , Masculino , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
The aim of the study was to show the role of tools in the evaluation of chronic pain (CP) in general practitioner (GP) everyday clinical practice. The study was done by analyzing electronic database of the first visits of 1090 CP patients referred to the Pain Clinic of the Karlovac General Hospital, Karlovac, Croatia, by their GPs. All patient records were analyzed according to the cause of CP, strongest pain a week before the examination, quality of sleep, and the Patients' Global Impression of Change scale. All statistical analyses were done using the IBM SPSS Statistics version 19.0.0.1 (www.spss.com). CP predominantly occurs in older age group. Patients with musculoskeletal pain accounted for the highest percentage (n = 316; 29%), followed by those with neuropathic pain (n = 253; 23.20%) and those with low back pain (n = 225; 20.60%). The mean pain intensity rating scale score was 8.3 ± 1.8 a week before the examination and the mean quality of sleep score was 6.8 ± 1.9. Moderate and severe sleep quality disorder was significantly present in patients over 65 years of age (p = 0.007), patients with musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain, back pain, and those having rated Patients' Global Impression of Change scale as worsening (p = 0.001). The severity of pain and poor quality of sleep are the leading causes of deterioration of the Patients' Global Impression of Change scale in patients suffering from musculoskeletal and neuropathic pain. In order to treat CP comprehensively, it is important for GPs to evaluate the outcomes of clinical treatment using tools for CP assessment.