Background:Proper positioning of the head and neck is important for an optimal laryngeal visualization. Traditionally, sniffing position (SP) is recommended to provide a superior glottic visualization, during direct laryngoscopy, enhancing the ease of intubation. Various studies in the last decade of this belief have challenged the need for sniffing position during intubation. We conducted a prospective study comparing the sniffing head position with simple head extension to study the laryngoscopic view and intubation difficulty during direct laryngoscopy.Materials and Methods:Five-hundred patients were included in this study and randomly distributed to SP or simple head extension. In the sniffing group, an incompressible head ring was placed under the head to raise its height by 7 cm from the neutral plane followed by maximal extension of the head. In the simple extension group, no headrest was placed under the head; however, maximal head extension was given at the time of laryngoscopy. Various factors as ability to mask ventilate, laryngoscopic visualization, intubation difficulty, and posture of the anesthesiologist during laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation were noted. In the incidence of difficult laryngoscopy (Cormack Grade III and IV), Intubation Difficulty Scale (IDS score) was compared between the two groups.Results:There was no significant difference between two groups in Cormack grades. The IDS score differed significantly between sniffing group and simple extension group (P = 0.000) with an increased difficulty during intubation in the simple head extension. Patients with simple head extension needed more lifting force, increased use of external laryngeal manipulation, and an increased use of alternate techniques during intubation when compared to SP.Conclusion:We conclude that compared to the simple head extension position, the SP should be used as a standard head position for intubation attempts under general anesthesia.

Background: The use of neuraxial anesthesia for caesarean section has dramatically increased in last 2 decades because it is easier to perform, safe to the mother and the fetus, and has a high degree of success rate. However, post-dural puncture headache is a well-known complication of spinal anesthesia. It is a common and incapacitating compliation following dura-arachnoid puncture and results in increased morbidity, prolonged hospital stay, increased cost, and patient dissatisfaction.Methods: It was a double-blinded comparative study conducted on 75 consecutive pregnant patients meeting the inclusion criteria of the study. Patient and anesthesiologist involved in collection of data were blinded to the gauge of the needle used. Standard anesthesia protocol was followed in all the patients and spinal anesthesia performed using 25G Quincke needle in 38 patients and 27G Quincke needle in 37 patients.Results: we included 75 consecutive patients in the age group 20-35 years in the study. Overall incidence of PDPH was 14.67% (11/75) in present study. 23.68% (9/38) and 5.4% (2/37) patients who received spinal anesthesia with 25G and 27G needles respectively developed PDPH. Difference was statistically insignificant.Conclusions: The incidence of PDPH was less in patients who underwent caesarean section under spinal anesthesia with 27G needle compared to that of patients in whom block was performed using 25G needles. However, there was no definite advantage of 27G Quincke needle over 25G Quincke needle as far as the incidence of PDPH is concerned.