Comparison of Two Different Positions for Ultrasound-Guided Intervertebral Distance Evaluation

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridKoner, Ozge/0000-0002-5618-2216
dc.contributor.authorAksu, Feyza
dc.contributor.authorKartufan, Ferda
dc.contributor.authorKoner, Ozge
dc.contributor.authorGormez, Aysegul
dc.contributor.authorKeles, Elif Cigdem
dc.date.accessioned2024-05-19T14:39:00Z
dc.date.available2024-05-19T14:39:00Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.departmentİstinye Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractObjective: During neuraxial anaesthesia, correct patient positioning is key for increased block success and (patient) comfort. The aim of this prospective study was to compare the lateral fetal decubitus (LFD) position with the sitting fetal lotus (SFL) regarding interspinous distance, transverse diameters of paravertebral muscles measured with ultrasonography, and patient comfort. Methods: Fifty adult participants who could sit cross-legged and had no lumbar anomalies were included in our prospective study. In both SFL and LFD positions, measurements were performed with ultrasonography; in the axial plane, interspinous distance at the level of L4-L5, in the sagittal plan, with the probe slightly tilted, subcutaneous tissue-spinous process depth, and transverse diameters of paravertebral muscles were measured. Stretcher, waist position, and abdominal comfort were scored on a scale of 1 (very bad) to 7 (perfect) with a verbal numeric satisfaction scale. Results: Interspinous distance was significantly larger in the SFL position than in the LFD position (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two positions (P > 0.05) regarding patient comfort. Paravertebral muscle diameters were significantly broader in the SFL position than in the LFD position. The diameter of the left paravertebral muscle in the SFL position (45.8 +/- 8.8 mm) was larger than that in the LFD position (43 +/- 7.8 mm; P < 0.001). The diameter of the right paravertebral muscle in the SFL position was (47 +/- 9 mm) larger than that in the LFD position (43.4 +/- 7.6 mm; P < 0.001). Conclusion: Although there was no difference regarding the comfort between the two positions, the interspinous distance was larger in the SFL position than in the LFD position.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.4274/TJAR.2023.231277
dc.identifier.endpage476en_US
dc.identifier.issn2667-6370
dc.identifier.issue6en_US
dc.identifier.pmid38149348en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85180878813en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage470en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org10.4274/TJAR.2023.231277
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12713/4672
dc.identifier.volume51en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:001167607500004en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityN/Aen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherGalenos Publ Houseen_US
dc.relation.ispartofTurkish Journal of Anaesthesiology and Reanimationen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessen_US
dc.snmz20240519_kaen_US
dc.subjectAnatomyen_US
dc.subjectLumbar Intervertebral Distanceen_US
dc.subjectNeuraxial Anaesthesiaen_US
dc.subjectPatient Positionen_US
dc.subjectUltrasonographyen_US
dc.titleComparison of Two Different Positions for Ultrasound-Guided Intervertebral Distance Evaluationen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu