The Effect of Active Warming on Postoperative Hypothermia on Body Temperature and Thermal Comfort: A Randomized Controlled Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 423-429
Author(s):  
Aysel Özsaban ◽  
Rengin Acaroğlu
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 356-364
Author(s):  
Jae Hwa Yoo ◽  
Si Young Ok ◽  
Sang Ho Kim ◽  
Ji Won Chung ◽  
Sun Young Park ◽  
...  

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of 10-min pre-warming in preventing inadvertent perioperative hypothermia, which is defined as a reduction in body temperature to less than 36.0℃ during the perioperative period in intraoperative warming patients. Methods: In this prospective randomized study, 60 patients scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia lasting less than 120 min were divided into two groups: the 10-min pre-warming group (n = 30) and the control group (n = 30). Patients in the 10-min pre-warming group were pre-warmed for 10 min in the pre-anesthetic area using a forced-air warmer set at 47ºC. Intraoperatively, we warmed all patients with a forced-air warmer. Body temperature was measured using a tympanic membrane thermometer pre- or postoperatively and a nasopharyngeal temperature probe intraoperatively. Patients were evaluated on the shivering and thermal comfort scale in the pre-anesthetic area and post-anesthesia care unit. Results: The incidences of intraoperative hypothermia and postoperative hypothermia were similar in both groups (10.7% vs. 28.6%, P = 0.177; 10.7% vs. 10.7%, P = 1.000 respectively). Body temperature was higher in the 10-min pre-warming group (P = 0.003). Thermal comfort during the pre-warming period was higher in the 10-min pre-warming group (P < 0.001). However, postoperative thermal comfort and shivering grades of both groups were similar.Conclusions: Ten minutes of pre-warming has no additional effect on the prevention of inadvertent perioperative hypothermia in intraoperative warming patients.


2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (1S) ◽  
pp. 412-424
Author(s):  
Elissa L. Conlon ◽  
Emily J. Braun ◽  
Edna M. Babbitt ◽  
Leora R. Cherney

Purpose This study reports on the treatment fidelity procedures implemented during a 5-year randomized controlled trial comparing intensive and distributed comprehensive aphasia therapy. Specifically, the results of 1 treatment, verb network strengthening treatment (VNeST), are examined. Method Eight participants were recruited for each of 7 consecutive cohorts for a total of 56 participants. Participants completed 60 hr of aphasia therapy, including 15 hr of VNeST. Two experienced speech-language pathologists delivered the treatment. To promote treatment fidelity, the study team developed a detailed manual of procedures and fidelity checklists, completed role plays to standardize treatment administration, and video-recorded all treatment sessions for review. To assess protocol adherence during treatment delivery, trained research assistants not involved in the treatment reviewed video recordings of a subset of randomly selected VNeST treatment sessions and completed the fidelity checklists. This process was completed for 32 participants representing 2 early cohorts and 2 later cohorts, which allowed for measurement of protocol adherence over time. Percent accuracy of protocol adherence was calculated across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition (intensive vs. distributed therapy). Results The fidelity procedures were sufficient to promote and verify a high level of adherence to the treatment protocol across clinicians, cohorts, and study condition. Conclusion Treatment fidelity strategies and monitoring are feasible when incorporated into the study design. Treatment fidelity monitoring should be completed at regular intervals during the course of a study to ensure that high levels of protocol adherence are maintained over time and across conditions.


2019 ◽  
Vol 62 (12) ◽  
pp. 4464-4482 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diane L. Kendall ◽  
Megan Oelke Moldestad ◽  
Wesley Allen ◽  
Janaki Torrence ◽  
Stephen E. Nadeau

Purpose The ultimate goal of anomia treatment should be to achieve gains in exemplars trained in the therapy session, as well as generalization to untrained exemplars and contexts. The purpose of this study was to test the efficacy of phonomotor treatment, a treatment focusing on enhancement of phonological sequence knowledge, against semantic feature analysis (SFA), a lexical-semantic therapy that focuses on enhancement of semantic knowledge and is well known and commonly used to treat anomia in aphasia. Method In a between-groups randomized controlled trial, 58 persons with aphasia characterized by anomia and phonological dysfunction were randomized to receive 56–60 hr of intensively delivered treatment over 6 weeks with testing pretreatment, posttreatment, and 3 months posttreatment termination. Results There was no significant between-groups difference on the primary outcome measure (untrained nouns phonologically and semantically unrelated to each treatment) at 3 months posttreatment. Significant within-group immediately posttreatment acquisition effects for confrontation naming and response latency were observed for both groups. Treatment-specific generalization effects for confrontation naming were observed for both groups immediately and 3 months posttreatment; a significant decrease in response latency was observed at both time points for the SFA group only. Finally, significant within-group differences on the Comprehensive Aphasia Test–Disability Questionnaire ( Swinburn, Porter, & Howard, 2004 ) were observed both immediately and 3 months posttreatment for the SFA group, and significant within-group differences on the Functional Outcome Questionnaire ( Glueckauf et al., 2003 ) were found for both treatment groups 3 months posttreatment. Discussion Our results are consistent with those of prior studies that have shown that SFA treatment and phonomotor treatment generalize to untrained words that share features (semantic or phonological sequence, respectively) with the training set. However, they show that there is no significant generalization to untrained words that do not share semantic features or phonological sequence features.


2001 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-71 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. A. Ahmadi-Abhari ◽  
S. Akhondzadeh ◽  
S. M. Assadi ◽  
O. L. Shabestari ◽  
Z. M. Farzanehgan ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document