No abstract

Circumcision is painful surgery and appropriate intraoperative anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia is required. This is recognised in the policies of the Royal Australasian College of Physicians and the majority of Australian State Health Departments. Nevertheless, anecdotal evidence exists that neonatal circumcision continues to be performed in Australia with either no anaesthesia or with inadequate anaesthesia. This paper presents the evidence that neonatal circumcision is painful and reviews the available anaesthetic techniques. The authors conclude that general anaesthesia is arguably the most reliable way of ensuring adequate anaesthesia, although this may mean deferment of the procedure until the child is older. Local or regional anaesthesia for neonatal circumcision ideally requires a separate skilled anaesthetist (other than the proceduralist) to monitor the patient and intervene if the anaesthesia is inadequate. Topical anaesthesia with lignocaine-prilocaine (EMLA) cream is insufficient.

No abstract

The SODIS technique may be applicable in the wilderness setting using tools commonly available in the backcountry. In this limited trial, specific types of containers common in wilderness settings demonstrated similar performance to the standard containers. With further study, solar disinfection in appropriate conditions may be included as a viable treatment option for wilderness water disinfection.

IntroductionThe Life Support for Trauma and Transport (LSTAT™) is a self-contained, stretcher-based miniature intensive care unit designed by the United States Army to provide care for critically injured patients during transport and in remote settings where resources are limited. The LSTAT contains conventional medical equipment that has been integrated into one platform and reduced in size to fit within the dimensional envelope of a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) stretcher. This study evaluated the clinical utility of the LSTAT in simulated and real clinical environments. Our hypothesis was that the LSTAT would be equivalent to conventional equipment in detecting and treating life-threatening problems.MethodsThirty-one anesthesiologists and recovery room nurses compared the LSTAT with conventional monitors while managing four simulated critical events. The time required to reach a diagnosis and treatment was recorded for each simulation. Subsequently, 10 consenting adult patients were placed on the LSTAT after surgery for postoperative care in the recovery room. Questionnaires about aspects of LSTAT functionality were completed by nine nurses who cared for the patients placed on the LSTAT.ResultsIn all of the simulations, there was no clinically significant difference in the time to diagnosis or treatment between the LSTAT and conventional equipment. All clinicians reported that they were able to manage the simulated patients properly with the LSTAT. Nursing staff reported that the LSTAT provided adequate equipment to care for the patients monitored during recovery from surgery and were able to detect critical changes in vital signs in a timely manner.DiscussionPreliminary evaluation of the LSTAT in simulated and postoperative environments demonstrated that the LSTAT provided appropriate equipment to detect and manage critical events in patient care. Further work in assessing LSTAT functionality in a higher-acuity environment is warranted.