College of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, 171 Ashley Avenue, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Department of Anesthesiology, Medical University of South Carolina, 171 Ashley Avenue, Charleston, SC, 29425, USA.
Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2021 Jan;140:110515. doi: 10.1016/j.ijporl.2020.110515. Epub 2020 Nov 19.
To evaluate the overall perioperative times among pediatric patients undergoing adenotonsillectomy (AT) who, in the perioperative period, received either parental presence at induction of anesthesia (PPIA), midazolam, both, or neither.
A retrospective chart review of patients under the age of twelve years who underwent AT during 2018 was performed at a tertiary children's hospital. Exclusion criteria were: patients with concomitant procedures done at the time of AT, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score greater than 3, or unclear documentation of PPIA participation. Patients were categorized into one of four groups: those who received PPIA, those who received midazolam, and those who received both or neither. Time spent in holding, the operating room, and in recovery were recorded. For comparison of continuous variables, either a One-Way ANOVA or a Kruskal-Wallis test was used as appropriate with post-hoc comparisons using a Dunn's Test.
A total of 274 patient charts were reviewed. After application of exclusion criteria, 152 charts were included for analysis. A total of 69 patients had PPIA alone, 18 received midazolam alone, 57 received both, and 8 had neither. The median age of the patients was 5.34 years (range 0.62-11.97). There was no significant difference in median time in holding between groups, but there was a significant difference in both OR and recovery time (p = 0.005 and p = 0.021 respectively). On further analysis with post-hoc pairwise comparisons, the only significant difference was between the midazolam only group and the group who received both PPIA and midazolam (p < 0.05), with patients receiving both having a shorter OR duration.
Patients who received both PPIA and midazolam had a shorter OR duration than patients in the midazolam only group. There were no significant differences found in holding time or recovery time between groups. This supports the conclusion that PPIA can be implemented when deemed appropriate without increasing time spent in the operating room and may even have a beneficial effect when compounded with midazolam.
评估在围手术期接受父母陪伴下诱导麻醉(PPIA)、咪达唑仑、两者或两者都不接受的行腺样体扁桃体切除术(AT)的儿科患者的整体围手术期时间。
对 2018 年在一家三级儿童医院接受 AT 的 12 岁以下患者进行了回顾性图表审查。排除标准为:同时进行其他手术、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)评分大于 3 或 PPIA 参与情况记录不明确的患者。患者分为四组之一:接受 PPIA 的患者、接受咪达唑仑的患者、接受两者的患者和两者都不接受的患者。记录在保持、手术室和恢复期间花费的时间。对于连续变量的比较,使用单因素方差分析或 Kruskal-Wallis 检验,并使用 Dunn 检验进行事后比较。
共审查了 274 份患者图表。应用排除标准后,纳入分析的图表为 152 份。共有 69 例患者单独接受 PPIA,18 例患者单独接受咪达唑仑,57 例患者同时接受两者,8 例患者两者都不接受。患者的中位年龄为 5.34 岁(范围 0.62-11.97)。组间中位保持时间无显著差异,但 OR 和恢复时间有显著差异(p=0.005 和 p=0.021)。进一步进行事后两两比较分析,唯一显著差异是咪达唑仑组与同时接受 PPIA 和咪达唑仑的组之间(p<0.05),同时接受两者的患者 OR 持续时间更短。
同时接受 PPIA 和咪达唑仑的患者的 OR 持续时间短于仅接受咪达唑仑的患者。组间在保持时间或恢复时间方面无显著差异。这支持这样的结论,即在适当的情况下可以实施 PPIA,而不会增加在手术室的时间,并且当与咪达唑仑联合使用时甚至可能产生有益的效果。