Comparison of two forced-air warming devices during foot and ankle surgery: a randomised controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (11) ◽  
pp. 340-344
Author(s):  
Jorge Javier Del Vecchio ◽  
Lucas Nicolás Chemes ◽  
Mauricio Esteban Ghioldi ◽  
Eric Daniel Dealbera ◽  
Pablo Daniel Morgillo

Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia is a frequent problem associated with surgical patients which can have significant consequences during surgery and in the immediate postoperative period. We compared 35 randomised patients using over vs. under body forced air heating. There were no statistically significant differences between some demographic and surgical parameters such as: age, weight, height, body mass index, length of anaesthesia and operation. Statistically significant differences were found between the patient’s admission to the operating room and 30 minutes and the end of the procedure on the under body patients group. This study analyses a uniform population of patients (Foot and Ankle Surgery) previously not studied and supports the use of under body blankets.

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (7-8) ◽  
pp. 1085-1093
Author(s):  
Neil Smith ◽  
Caroline Abernethy ◽  
Victoria Allgar ◽  
Louise Foster ◽  
Victoria Martinson ◽  
...  

Heart ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 104 (8) ◽  
pp. 685-690 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron Conway ◽  
Suzanna Ersotelos ◽  
Joanna Sutherland ◽  
Jed Duff

ObjectiveForced air warming (FAW) during general anaesthesia is a safe and effective intervention used to reduce hypothermia. The objective of this study was to determine if FAW reduces hypothermia when used for procedures performed with sedation in the cardiac catheterisation laboratory.MethodsA parallel-group randomised controlled trial was conducted. Adults receiving sedation in a cardiac catheterisation laboratory at two sites were randomised to receive FAW or usual care, which involved passive warming with heated cotton blankets. Hypothermia, defined as a temperature less than 36°C measured with a sublingual digital thermometer after procedures, was the primary outcome. Other outcomes were postprocedure temperature, shivering, thermal comfort and major complications.ResultsA total of 140 participants were randomised. Fewer participants who received FAW were hypothermic (39/70, 56% vs 48/69, 70%, difference 14%; adjusted RR 0.75, 95% CI=0.60 to 0.94), and body temperature was 0.3°C higher (95% CI=0.1 to 0.5, p=0.004). FAW increased thermal comfort (63/70, 90% vs51/69, 74% difference 16%, RR 1.21, 95% CI=1.04 to 1.42). The incidence of shivering was similar (3/69, 4% vs 0/71 0%, difference 4%, 95% CI=−1.1 to 9.8). One patient in the control group required reintervention for bleeding. No other major complications occurred.ConclusionFAW reduced hypothermia and improved thermal comfort. The difference in temperature between groups was modest and less than that observed in previous studies where use of FAW decreased risk of surgical complications. Therefore, it should not be considered clinically significant.Trial registration numberACTRN12616000013460.


Author(s):  
Sirkka‐Liisa Lauronen ◽  
Marja‐Tellervo Mäkinen ◽  
Päivi Annila ◽  
Heini Huhtala ◽  
Arvi Yli‐Hankala ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document