Objective: Evaluation of the hemodynamic, respiratory and fetal side effects of two protocols for spinal anesthesia (P1: bupivacaine-fentanyl; P2: ropivacaine-fentanyl). Material and Method: Prospective pseudo-randomized study comparing two spinal anesthesia protocols for emergency cesarean section conducted in the operating room of the regional hospital center of Saint Louis in Senegal. Study duration was 4 months. We studied, age, indication for Caesarean section, medical and surgical history, P1 and P2 protocols, hypotension, bradycardia, Apgar scores at birth and at 5min. Univariate and bivariate analysis was performed on the R software. Result: A total of 115 patients were collected, with a mean age of 27.1 years (E: 15 - 45) and a standard deviation of 7.6. Indications for Caesarean section were maternal and fetal dystocia for 67 patients (58%), fetal distress for 39 parturients (34%), and pre-eclampsia for 5 patients (4%). The P1-Bupi spinal protocol was used in 42 patients (36.5%) and the P2-Ropi spinal protocol was used in 73 patients (63.5%). Anesthetic complications such as low blood pressure, bradycardia and desaturation were found in a total of 30 patients, i.e. in 26% of cases. The mean Apgar score at birth for newborns from the P1-Bupi protocol was 8 (Extremes: 7, 9); the mean Apgar score at birth for newborns from the P2-Ropi protocol was 7.5 (Extremes: 2, 10). There was a significantly negative correlation between the P1-bupi protocol and the appearance of hypotension with p-value: 0.04 and a significantly positive correlation between the P2-ropi protocol and the appearance of hypotension with p-value: 0.04. Discussion/ Conclusion: Ropivacaine certainly has a better cardiovascular and neurological tolerance and a better efficacy in terms of analgesia. However, during caesarean sections, it is important to consider the risk of hypotension and possible fetal complications related to its use. Keywords: Ropivacaine - Bupivacaine - Spinal anesthesia - Caesarean section

ObjectivesTo prospectively assess health-related quality of life (HRQoL), global functionality, and disability in primary caregivers of surviving children and adolescents after COVID-19.MethodsA longitudinal observational study was carried out on primary caregivers of surviving pediatric post-COVID-19 patients (n = 51) and subjects without COVID-19 (n = 60). EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) and 12-question WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) were answered for both groups. The univariate regression analysis was carried out using SPSS (v 20) and significance was established at 5%.ResultsThe median duration between COVID-19 diagnosis in children and adolescents and longitudinal follow-up visits was 4.4 months (0.8–10.7). The median age of children and adolescents caregivers with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 was similar to primary caregivers of subjects without laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 [43.2 (31.6–60.9) vs. 41.5 (21.6–54.8) years, p = 0.08], as well as similar female sex (p = 1.00), level of schooling (p = 0.11), social assistance program (p = 0.28), family income/month U$ (p = 0.25) and the number of household’s members in the residence (p = 0.68). The frequency of slight to extreme problems (level ≥ 2) of the pain/discomfort domain according to EQ-5D-5L score was significantly higher in the former group [74% vs. 52.5%, p = 0.03, OR = 2.57 (1.14–5.96)]. The frequency of disability according to WHODAS 2.0 total score was similar to those without disability and unknown (p = 0.79); however, with a very high disability in both groups (72.5% and 78.3%). Further analysis of primary caregivers of children and adolescents with post-COVID-19 condition (PCC) [n = 12/51 (23%)] compared to those without PCC [n = 39/51(77%)] revealed no differences between demographic data, EQ-5D-5L and WHODAS 2.0 scores in both groups (p > 0.05).ConclusionWe longitudinally demonstrated that pain/discomfort were predominantly reported in approximately 75% of primary caregiver of COVID-19 patients, with high disability in approximately three-quarters of both caregiver groups. These data emphasized the prospective and systematic caregiver burden evaluation relevance of pediatric COVID-19.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract