Postoperative Analgesia using Bupivacaine Wound Infiltration with Intravenous Tramadol or Dexamethasone Following Obstetric Spinal Anaesthesia

Context: Effective management of postcesarean section (CS) pain is important for the well‑being of mother and child; even in limited‑resource areas, there are drug options which can be explored to achieve this. Aim: This study aimed to compare the analgesic effects of a combination of bupivacaine wound infiltration with either intravenous (IV) dexamethasone or tramadol after CS. Setting and Design: This study was a randomized, double‑blind, comparative study in a tertiary hospital. Clearance obtained from the Institution’s Ethics and Research Committee. Methods: One hundred and twenty American Society of Anesthesiologists I or II pregnant women scheduled for CS under spinal anesthesia were recruited after giving consent. At the end of skin closure, all the patients received 20 ml of 0.1% plain bupivacaine for wound infiltration and IV dexamethasone 8 mg (Group BD) or tramadol 100 mg (Group BT). Outcome measures were time to first analgesic request, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, side effects, and patients’ satisfaction. Results: Time to first analgesic request was 3.2 ± 1.87 and 3.3 ± 2.01 h for BD and BT groups, respectively (P = 0.778). VAS scores for the first 2 h were lower in the bupivacaine/tramadol group compared to bupivacaine/dexamethasone group; the differences were statistically significant at 30 and 60 min (P = 0.027 and 0.008), respectively. Ninety percent versus 93% of the patients in BD and BT groups, respectively, expressed good to excellent satisfaction with pain relief. Conclusion: Combination of bupivacaine wound infiltration and IV tramadol provided better quality pain relief.Keywords: Bupivacaine wound infiltration, cesarean section, intravenous dexamethasone, intravenous tramadol, postoperative pai

The ASOS Surgical Risk Calculator: development and validation of a tool for identifying African surgical patients at risk of severe postoperative complications

Background: The African Surgical Outcomes Study (ASOS) showed that surgical patients in Africa have a mortality twice the global average. Existing risk assessment tools are not valid for use in this population because the pattern of risk for poor outcomes differs from high-income countries. The objective of this study was to derive and validate a simple, preoperative risk stratification tool to identify African surgical patients at risk for in-hospital postoperative mortality and severe complications. Methods: ASOS was a 7-day prospective cohort study of adult patients undergoing surgery in Africa. The ASOS Surgical Risk Calculator was constructed with a multivariable logistic regression model for the outcome of in-hospital mortality and severe postoperative complications. The following preoperative risk factors were entered into the model; age, sex, smoking status, ASA physical status, preoperative chronic comorbid conditions, indication for surgery, urgency, severity, and type of surgery. Results: The model was derived from 8799 patients from 168 African hospitals. The composite outcome of severe postoperative complications and death occurred in 423/8799 (4.8%) patients. The ASOS Surgical Risk Calculator includes the following risk factors: age, ASA physical status, indication for surgery, urgency, severity, and type of surgery. The model showed good discrimination with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.805 and good calibration with c-statistic corrected for optimism of 0.784. Conclusions: This simple preoperative risk calculator could be used to identify high-risk surgical patients in African hospitals and facilitate increased postoperative surveillance. © 2018 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Medical Research Council of South Africa gran