SummaryIn a prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled trial, we compared the efficacy of patientcontrolled analgesia using remifentanil (25-30 lg per bolus) with intramuscular pethidine (50-75 mg) for labour analgesia in 69 parturients. Parturients receiving patient-controlled analgesia reported less pain than those receiving intramuscular pethidine throughout the study period (p < 0.001), with maximal reduction in visual analogue pain score at 2 h after commencement of analgesia (mean (SD) 20 (17) in the patient-controlled analgesia group and 36 (22) in the intramuscular pethidine group. The median (95% CI) time to the first request for rescue analgesics was significantly longer with patient-controlled analgesia (8.0 (6.8-9.2) h) compared with intramuscular pethidine (4.9 (3.8-5.4) h, p < 0.001). Maternal satisfaction scores were also higher with remifentanil compared with intramuscular pethidine (p = 0.001). There was no report of sedation, aponea or oxygen desaturation in either group, and Apgar scores were similar between groups. We conclude that patient-controlled analgesia with remifentanil provides better labour analgesia and maternal satisfaction than intramuscular pethidine. At this dose, maternal and fetal side effects were uncommon.

Handheld personal digital assistants (PDA) are increasingly being used by physicians for a variety of information and data management purposes. We evaluated a PDA-based data management system for our acute pain service. A structured questionnaire survey was conducted to assess staff experience and attitude towards the paper system before the introduction of the PDA, and three months after introduction of the PDA system. We compared the time taken to conduct the acute pain round before and after the implementation of the PDA. The time saved in data management and the amount of paper saved were estimated. Data from 177 patients with a total of 635 acute pain follow-up visits were entered over a three-month period. User satisfaction, ease of access to drug reference and clinical guidelines were similar between the two systems. The respondents found that the PDA was easy to use but less so than the paper system (P=0.007), in particular, when accessing a patient's cumulative data (P=0.007). There was no missed follow-up or data entry with the use of PDA. The time taken to attend follow-up visits was similar for the two systems (Paper: 8.8±3.2 compared to PDA: 7.0±2.0 minutes, P=0.151). The estimated annual amount of paper and time saved in data management was 650 sheets and 130 man-hours respectively. Our experience with the use of the PDA in APS was satisfactory. The PDA system can potentially reduce time and paper use and missed data entry and patient follow-up.

We conducted a crossover randomised study to evaluate the performance of a novel optical stylet, the InnoScope, for tracheal intubation in simulated normal and difficult airways. Twenty-five anaesthetists attempted tracheal intubation on a SimMan 3G simulator using the InnoScope first followed by the Macintosh laryngoscope or vice versa. Three airway scenarios were tested: (1) normal airway; (2) difficult airway with swollen pharynx; and (3) limited neck movement. In each scenario, the laryngeal view, duration of and success rate for tracheal intubation were recorded. Compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, the use of InnoScope increased the percentage of glottic opening seen by 17% in normal airway, 23% in the difficult airway and 32% with limited neck movement, p < 0.01. Despite this better laryngeal view, successful tracheal intubation achieved with the InnoScope (88.0%) was lower than that for the Macintosh laryngoscope (98.7%), p = 0.008. Using the InnoScope, tracheal intubation during the first attempt was only successful in 48% of cases with difficult airway. In this scenario, the median (interquartile range [range]) duration of tracheal intubation was significantly longer with [corrected] InnoScope compared with the Macintosh laryngoscope, (70 (19-120 [15-120)] s vs 30 [21-58 (15-120)] s, [corrected] p = 0.01. We conclude that an improved laryngeal view with the use of the InnoScope did not translate into better conditions for tracheal intubation.

In the Summary of this paper [1], the sentence:

No abstract