Dolor posoperatorio en craneotomía

In the postoperative period, 47% to 75% of the patients report some degree of pain. This study aimed to evaluate pain in the pre and postoperative period of patients submitted to craniotomy. This prospective research was carried out at the neurosurgery unit of a large Brazilian hospital. For a quantitative evaluation of pain, the verbal numeric 0 - 10 rating scale was used. Forty patients with a mean age of 36 years were evaluated. In the preoperative period, 34 (85%) patients indicated headache as the main cause of pain. In the postoperative period, 37 (93%) patients complained of pain while three (7%) reported absence of pain. Pain peaks were observed on the 2nd postoperative day, when 12 (32%) of the patients reported severe pain and 10 (27%) moderate pain. Absence of severe pain occurred after the 8th postoperative day. It was concluded that protocols of analgesia in craniotomy are needed, such as training nurses to better evaluate and handle pain.En el periodo postoperatorio, entre el 47% y el 75% de los pacientes relatan algún grado de dolor. Los objetivos de este trabajo fueron evaluar el dolor en el pre y postoperatorio de pacientes sometidos a craneotomía. Este estudio prospectivo fue realizado en la unidad de neurocirugía del Hospital São Paulo, Brasil. Para una evaluación cuantitativa del dolor se utilizó la escala numérica verbal graduada de 0 a 10. Fueron evaluados 40 pacientes con edad mediana de 36 años. En el preoperatorio 34 (85%) pacientes, reportaran cefalea como la principal causa del dolor. En el postoperatorio, 37 (93%) pacientes se quejaron de dolor, mientras 3 (7%) pacientes indicaron ausencia de dolor. El pico de dolor fue observado en el segundo día postoperatorio, cuando 12 (32%) pacientes reportaron dolor grave y 10 (27%) moderado. La ausencia de dolor grave ocurrió después del 8º día postoperatorio. Se concluyó que son necesarios protocolos de analgesia en craneotomía, tales como el entrenamiento de enfermeros para mejor evaluar y manejar el dolor.No pós-operatório, 47 a 75% dos pacientes relatam algum grau de dor. O objetivo deste trabalho foi avaliar a dor no pré e pós-operatório de pacientes submetidos a craniotomia. Estudo prospectivo, realizado na unidade de neurocirurgia do Hospital São Paulo. Para avaliação quantitativa de dor, foi utilizada a escala numérica verbal, graduada de 0 a 10. Foram avaliados 40 pacientes, com idade mediana de 36 anos. No pré-operatório, 34 (85%) pacientes relataram cefaléia como a principal causa de dor. No pós-operatório, 37 (93%) pacientes queixaram-se de dor e 3 (7%) pacientes referiram ausência de dor. O pico da dor foi observado no 2º pós-operatório, quando 16 (40%) dos pacientes referiram dor intensa e 11 (28%) queixaram-se de dor moderada. Ausência de dor intensa ocorreu após 6º pós-operatório. Concluí-se que há necessidade de protocolos de analgesia em craniotomia, como treinamento para os enfermeiros para melhor avaliação e manejo da dor.Hospital Israelita Albert EinsteinUniversidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)UNIFESPSciEL

Two images of Nantes as a ‘Green Model’ of Urban Planning and Governance: The ‘Collaborative City’ Versus the ‘Slow City’

This article examines how the city of Nantes, European Green Capital in 2013, came to promote plans for a new international airport at Notre-Dame-des-Landes. Deploying poststructuralist discourse theory, it analyses how the highly politicised struggle against the airport reveals the limits of the Nantes model of urban sustainability and collaboration, giving rise to a counter model, which we provisionally characterise as the ‘slow city’. While the struggle against the airport can be understood as a rural social movement, we show how its ideals and logics have been progressively displaced to Nantes itself, disclosing new images and possibilities of urban governance

Stroke volume variation and indexed stroke volume measured using bioreactance predict fluid responsiveness in postoperative children †

International audienc

To buy or not to buy—evaluating commercial AI solutions in radiology (the ECLAIR guidelines)

Abstract Artificial intelligence (AI) has made impressive progress over the past few years, including many applications in medical imaging. Numerous commercial solutions based on AI techniques are now available for sale, forcing radiology practices to learn how to properly assess these tools. While several guidelines describing good practices for conducting and reporting AI-based research in medicine and radiology have been published, fewer efforts have focused on recommendations addressing the key questions to consider when critically assessing AI solutions before purchase. Commercial AI solutions are typically complicated software products, for the evaluation of which many factors are to be considered. In this work, authors from academia and industry have joined efforts to propose a practical framework that will help stakeholders evaluate commercial AI solutions in radiology (the ECLAIR guidelines) and reach an informed decision. Topics to consider in the evaluation include the relevance of the solution from the point of view of each stakeholder, issues regarding performance and validation, usability and integration, regulatory and legal aspects, and financial and support services. Key Points • Numerous commercial solutions based on artificial intelligence techniques are now available for sale, and radiology practices have to learn how to properly assess these tools. • We propose a framework focusing on practical points to consider when assessing an AI solution in medical imaging, allowing all stakeholders to conduct relevant discussions with manufacturers and reach an informed decision as to whether to purchase an AI commercial solution for imaging applications. • Topics to consider in the evaluation include the relevance of the solution from the point of view of each stakeholder, issues regarding performance and validation, usability and integration, regulatory and legal aspects, and financial and support services. </jats:sec