Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Mar;65(3):191-196.
doi: 10.4103/ija.IJA_1121_20. Epub 2021 Mar 13.

Patient satisfaction with regional anaesthesia and general anaesthesia in upper limb surgeries: An open label, cross-sectional, prospective, observational clinical comparative study

Priyanka Suresh  1 , Akash Mukherjee  1
Affiliations

Patient satisfaction with regional anaesthesia and general anaesthesia in upper limb surgeries: An open label, cross-sectional, prospective, observational clinical comparative study

Priyanka Suresh et al. Indian J Anaesth. 2021 Mar.

Abstract

Background and aims: An important assessment of the quality of health care is patient satisfaction. However, only few studies are available which look into this aspect. The primary objective of this study was to compare patient satisfaction between regional anaesthesia (RA) and general anaesthesia (GA) in patients undergoing upper limb surgeries. The length of hospital stay and duration of analgesia between the two techniques were the secondary objectives.

Methods: This cross-sectional study was carried out in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Patients aged between 18 years and 60 years, of physical status American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade 1-3, undergoing upper limb surgeries were included in the study. Patient satisfaction with anaesthesia was assessed in patients receiving GA and RA, with 100 patients in each group, at least 24 h after the surgery with a 10-item predesigned peri-operative questionnaire. The continuous variables were compared between the groups using Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test, and for categorical variables Chi-square test was used.

Results: The patients in group RA showed significantly higher satisfaction scores than those in GA (P < 0.001) with respect to all the 10 items of the questionnaire and the total score. Duration of analgesia was also significantly longer in RA than GA (P < 0.001). Duration of hospital stay was also significantly longer in GA than in RA (P < 0.001).

Conclusions: RA for upper limb surgeries provides better patient satisfaction than GA, along with a longer duration of analgesia and lesser duration of hospital stay.

Keywords: General anaesthesia; patient satisfaction; regional anaesthesia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
CONSORT diagram. GA: General Anaesthesia; RA: Regional anaesthesia; USG: Ultrasonography
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Barnett SF, Alagar RK, Grocott MPW, Giannaris S, Dick JR, Moonesinghe SR. Patient-satisfaction measures in anesthesia: Qualitative systematic review. Anesthesiology. 2013;119:452–78. - PubMed
    1. Capuzzo M, Landi F, Bassani A, Grassi L, Volta CA, Alvisi R. Emotional and interpersonal factors are most important for patient satisfaction with anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2005;49:735–42. - PubMed
    1. Moonesinghe SR, Tomlinson AA. Quality improvement and revalidation: Two goals, same strategy? Br J Anaesth. 2011;106:447–50. - PubMed
    1. Droog W, Hoeks SE, van Aggelen GP, Lin D-Y, Coert JH, Stolker RJ, et al. Regional anaesthesia is associated with less patient satisfaction compared to general anaesthesia following distal upper extremity surgery: A prospective double centred observational study. BMC Anesthesiol. 2019;19:115. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Hocking G, Weightman WM, Smith C, Gibbs NM, Sherrard K. Measuring the quality of anaesthesia from a patient's perspective: Development, validation, and implementation of a short questionnaire. Br J Anaesth. 2013;111:979–89. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources