cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Ristiawan Muji Laksono
Contact Email
anestpain@ub.ac.id
Phone
+6281336172271
Journal Mail Official
anestpain@ub.ac.id
Editorial Address
Anesthesiology and Intensive Therapy Program, Medicine FacultyBrawijaya University, Malang Indonesia Jl. Jaksa Agung Suprapto no.2, Malang, Indonesia
Location
Kota malang,
Jawa timur
INDONESIA
Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain
Published by Universitas Brawijaya
ISSN : 27223167     EISSN : 27223205     DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.21776/ub.jap
Core Subject : Health,
Health Professions Medicine & Pharmacology
Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain is a peer-reviewed and open-access journal that focuses on anesthesia and pain. Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain, published by Anesthesiology and Intensive Therapy Specialist Program of Medicine Faculty, Brawijaya University. This journal publishes original articles, case reports, and reviews. The Journal s mission is to offer the latest scientific information on anesthesiology and pain management by providing a forum for clinical researchers, scientists, clinicians, and other health professionals. This journal publishes three times a year. Subjects suitable for the Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain are all subjects related to anesthesiology and pain management.
Arjuna Subject : Kedokteran - Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): September" : 5 Documents clear
A Retrospective Case Series of Anaesthetic Management of Children with Temporomandibular Joint Ankylosis from a Tertiary Level Referral Paediatric Hospital Ganigara, Anuradha; Ravishankar, Chandrakala Kunigal; Ashwathanarayanashett, Bhavana Dalasanura; Mariam, Mahdiyyah; Vakoda, Chandrika Yabagodu Rama
Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): September
Publisher : Faculty of Medicine, Brawijaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/ub.jap.2024.005.03.05

Abstract

Background: Children with temporomandibular joint ankylosis (TMJA) are associated with a difficult airway and require special anesthesia management. No clear guidelines have been issued for managing difficult airways in children, especially for TMJA.  Therefore, the aim of this retrospective case study was to understand the difficulties in airway access faced in children with TMJA and to describe the various techniques for successful airway management.Case: We conducted a retrospective review from 2017 to 2022 of 14 children aged 2-14 years who presented for surgical correction of unilateral or bilateral TMJ ankylosis (TMJA) at a pediatric tertiary referral center.  The maximal interincisor distance (MID) and Colorado pediatric airway score (COPUR) were used to plan airway management in these children. Unilateral TMJA was seen in 11 children; the remaining 3 had bilateral TMJA with MID < 1 cm. Flexible fiberoptic intubation was used as an aid to facilitate intubation in a total of five children with MID ≤ 1 cm. Video laryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy were suitable for visualizing the glottic opening in the remaining children with a midline deviation (MID) greater than 1 cm. Conclusion: Flexible fiberoptic intubation is beneficial for airway management in children with bilateral and/or unilateral TMJA and MID ≤ 1 cm. Children with lesser degrees of mouth opening restriction were successfully managed with video laryngoscopy and direct laryngoscopy for airway control. This preliminary report provides vital information about the decision-making and referral process for children with TMJA, taking into consideration the varying infrastructural resources available in low- and middle-income settings.   
Comparison of Efficacy of Bolus Dosages of Norepinephrine, Phenylephrine, and Ephedrine in Treating Post-Spinal Hypotension During Elective Cesarean Section: A Randomized Double-Blinded Controlled Trial Ganeshnavar, Anilkumar Sangappa; Endigeri, Archana; Chitti, Prashant Kumar Reddy; Nair, Vinduja; Konappanavar, Chaitra
Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): September
Publisher : Faculty of Medicine, Brawijaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/ub.jap.2024.005.03.04

Abstract

Background: Phenylephrine and ephedrine are widely used to manage spinal-induced hypotension after cesarean section. Norepinephrine is an alternative vasopressor that maintains the heart rate. This study compared the efficacy and safety of bolus administration of norepinephrine, phenylephrine, and ephedrine for treating post-spinal hypotension during elective cesarean section.Methods: This prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled trial included patients between 20–45 years of age undergoing elective cesarean section; they were randomized into three groups receive norepinephrine 6 µg (Group A, n = 45), phenylephrine 100 µg (Group B, n = 45), or ephedrine 6 mg (Group C, n = 45) boluses after a 20% drop in blood pressure. The primary objective was to compare the efficacy (total doses required) and safety (maternal complications) of treating post-spinal hypotension. Secondary objectives assessed neonatal outcomes using fetal arterial blood gas and Apgar scores. Mean differences were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance at a 95% confidence level (α = 0.05).Result: The total number of drug boluses required to treat maternal hypotension was significantly lower in group A (1.78 ± 0.74) than in groups B (1.93 ± 0.69) and C (2.38 ± 0.81) (F = 7.89; p < 0.001). Tachycardia occurred more frequently in group C (37.8%) than in groups A (15.6%) and B (26.7%) (p = 0.001). The incidence of bradycardia was higher in group B (24.4%) than in groups A (20%) and C (6.7%) (p = 0.001). Maternal complications were comparable between the groups, with no significant differences in neonatal outcomes.Conclusion: Norepinephrine is a potent drug with a better hemodynamic profile than phenylephrine and ephedrine.
Comparative Study of Epidural Block with Combined Femoral and Sciatic Nerve Block in Adults for Lower Limb Surgery using Bupivacaine with Fentanyl Gulia, Abhity; Kohli, Pramod; Pandey, Maitree
Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): September
Publisher : Faculty of Medicine, Brawijaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/ub.jap.2024.005.03.03

Abstract

Background: Combined femoral and sciatic nerve blocks for lower limb surgery have been shown to be as effective as epidural blocks for intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative analgesia. This study compared the analgesic effect of epidural and the combined femoral and sciatic nerve block for lower limb surgeries in adults.Methods: This randomized controlled study included 60 patients who underwent lower limb surgery, divided into two groups to receive epidural (Group E, n = 30) or combined femoral and sciatic nerve block (Group PNB, n = 30). The duration of sensory and motor block, intraoperative hemodynamics, duration of postoperative analgesia, and adverse effects were assessed. Data was analyzed using McNemar’s test with α = 0.05.Result: There are no intraoperative hemodynamic changes in group PNB. The sensory block lasted 18.81 ± 1.78 hours, and postoperative analgesia for 17 ± 1.87 hours in group PNB. Whereas in group E, the sensory blockade lasted for 6.54 ± 0.87 hours and postoperative analgesia for 5.13 ± 1.13 hours (p = 0.000). The duration of the motor blockade in group E was 4.48 ± 1.02 hours. No motor blockade was seen in group PNB. No nausea, vomiting, hypotension, numbness, or urine retention were noted in group PNB. In group E, hypotension was noted at 15, 30, and 45 minutes, with 33.3% having nausea and 13.3% postoperative vomiting.Conclusion: Femoral and sciatic nerve block provide similar surgical conditions for lower limb surgeries with better hemodynamic stability, earlier ambulation, and longer duration of postoperative analgesia than epidural.
Comparison of Intermittent Epidural Bolus and Continuous Epidural Infusion for Postoperative Pain Management in Abdominal Surgery Patients Siswagama, Taufiq Agus; Asmoro, Aswoco Andyk; Subagyo, Houdini Pradanawan; Laksono, Buyung Hartiyo
Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): September
Publisher : Faculty of Medicine, Brawijaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/ub.jap.2024.005.03.02

Abstract

Background: Abdominal surgery often leads to high postoperative pain scores, which are commonly managed using epidural analgesia through either continuous infusion or intermittent bolus administration. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of intermittent epidural bolus and continuous epidural infusion in managing postoperative pain among patients who underwent abdominal surgery.Methods: This cross-sectional study included 90 patients who underwent abdominal surgery and were randomly assigned to two groups. Group one received intermittent epidural bolus analgesia with ropivacaine 0.1875% and fentanyl 50 µg, administered as 10 cm³ every 8 hours (n=45). Group two received continuous epidural infusion analgesia with ropivacaine 0.1875% and fentanyl 100 µg, in a total volume of 50 cm³ at a rate of 3 cm³/hour (n=45). Pain levels were assessed using the numerical rating scale (NRS) at rest and during movement, measured every 12 hours for 84 hours. Statistical analysis was conducted using the independent t-test with a significance level of α=0.05 and a 95% confidence interval.Result: At 24 hours postoperatively, the NRS at rest was significantly lower in the continuous infusion epidural (0.15 ± 0.36) compared to the intermittent bolus (0.91 ± 0.35) (p=0.000), and this trend persisted at subsequent time points (36, 48, 60, 72, and 80 hours postoperatively). For movement, the NRS at 36 hours was also lower in the continuous infusion epidural (1.00 ± 0.00) compared to the intermittent bolus (1.29 ± 0.45) (p=0.000), with similar differences observed at other time points.Conclusion: Continuous epidural infusion provides superior analgesia to intermittent epidural bolus administration in abdominal surgery patients. This method is associated with faster and sustained reductions in pain intensity at rest and during movement.
Efficacy and Outcomes of Interventional Procedures in Cancer Pain Management: A Retrospective Cohort Study Steele, Patrick; Young, Jamie; Koh, Angelina; Ungar, Rafael; Shahzad, Eeman
Journal of Anaesthesia and Pain Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): September
Publisher : Faculty of Medicine, Brawijaya University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/ub.jap.2024.005.03.01

Abstract

Background: Interventional procedures used for opioid-resistant cancer pain lack evidence. This study aimed to determine the effects of interventional procedures on pain, function, distress, and opioid consumption to improve the understanding of their role in cancer pain.Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 74 patients who received interventional procedures as inpatients or outpatients for cancer pain between 2021 and 2022; the primary outcomes included pain and oral morphine equivalent daily dose (oMEDD). For inpatients receiving palliative care management, the secondary outcomes were function and distress associated with pain. These were measured pre-intervention, on the day of intervention, and 3 months post-intervention. The outcomes were compared using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with α = 0.05.Result: Most patients underwent palliative management (67.6%) and had pancreatic cancer (23.0%). In total, 94.5% of patients received temporary peripheral, neuraxial, or sympathetic blocks. Pain was most commonly experienced in the lower limbs (43.2%) and abdomen (33.8%). For the inpatients, there was a reduction in pain scores, distress, and post-intervention maintenance of function; however, these results were insignificant. Overall, the extension of oMEDD was greater in this group (p < 0.05). There was insufficient data for outpatients to assess pain, function, and distress; however, there was a decrease in regular oMEDD post-intervention (p > 0.05).Conclusion: Although interventions reduced pain, maintained function, and reduced the distress associated with pain in palliative patients, most of these results were statistically insignificant. A significant increase in inpatient oMEDD may be consistent with disease progression. Conversely, a decrease in outpatient oMEDD may suggest a more stable disease course, potentially benefiting from earlier interventions for opioid-sparing reasons.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2024 2024


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 6 No. 3 (2025): In Press Vol. 6 No. 2 (2025): May Vol. 6 No. 1 (2025): January In Press Vol 5, No 3 (2024): September Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): September Vol 5, No 2 (2024): May Vol. 5 No. 2 (2024): May Vol 5, No 1 (2024): January Vol. 5 No. 1 (2024): January Vol. 4 No. 3 (2023): September Vol 4, No 3 (2023): September Vol. 4 No. 2 (2023): May Vol 4, No 2 (2023): May Vol 4, No 1 (2023): January Vol. 4 No. 1 (2023): January Vol 3, No 3 (2022): September Vol 3, No 2 (2022): May Vol. 3 No. 2 (2022): May Vol 3, No 1 (2022): January Vol 2, No 3 (2021): September Vol 2, No 2 (2021): May Vol 2, No 1 (2021): January Vol 1, No 3 (2020): September Vol 1, No 2 (2020): May Vol 1, No 1 (2020): January More Issue