Why the study?
What is the incidence and etiology of failed spinal anesthetics using tetracaine in a university hospital?
What is the incidence and etiology of failed spinal anesthetics using tetracaine in a university hospital?
The failure rate of spinal anesthesia with tetracaine was 4%, primarily driven by errors in judgment rather than technical errors.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Judgment errors predominate in tetracaine spinal failures; hypothesis-generating for education interventions pending prospective validation.
Two recent retrospective reports on the incidence of failed spinal anesthetics that indicated extremely variable results prompted the present prospective study of 200 consecutive spinal anesthetics to determine the incidence and causes of failed spinal anesthetics. Tetracaine was the spinal anesthetic agent utilized in all cases--crystalline tetracaine (Niphanoid) in 71% and a 1% solution in 19% of the cases. The failure rate overall was 4%, with all failures being due to anesthetic factors, both technical and pharmacologic. However, only 25% of the failures were due to errors in technique, and 75% were due to errors in judgment with respect to pharmacologic factors (dosage, use of epinephrine, and/or positioning of the patient). Our data, therefore, differ from those of Levy et al. (Anesth Analg 1985;64:705-10), both in terms of failure rate, which is 25% of theirs, and in terms of causation, with our data indicating errors in judgment to be the causative factor three times as often as errors in technique. Presumably, this difference is due to the greater experience in spinal anesthesia that a resident receives at our institution.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Munhall et al. (1988) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: