Position Differences, Postoperative Hypoxemia
Conditions
Keywords
Lateral positioning, Hypoxemia, Semirecumbent positioning
Brief summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to learn which positioning strategy works better to prevent postoperative hypoxemia in surgical patients: semirecumbent positioning or lateral positioning. It will also learn about the safety and effectiveness of these two positioning approaches. The main questions it aims to answer are: Does semirecumbent positioning reduce the incidence of postoperative hypoxemia more effectively than lateral positioning? Does lateral positioning reduce the incidence of postoperative hypoxemia more effectively than semirecumbent positioning? What are the differences in patient comfort and recovery outcomes between these two positioning strategies? Researchers will compare semirecumbent positioning directly to lateral positioning to see which approach is more effective in preventing postoperative hypoxemia. Participants will: Be randomly assigned to either semirecumbent positioning or lateral positioning after surgery Have their oxygen levels and breathing monitored regularly during the postoperative period Receive standard post-surgical care with their assigned positioning strategy Be assessed for comfort levels and any positioning-related complications Have their recovery progress tracked throughout their hospital stay.
Interventions
BEHAVIORALLateral positioning
Patients allocated to lateral positioning were placed at 90° on a horizontal bed, supported with a pillow to maintain neutral alignment of the spine and avoid hyperextension or forward flexion of the neck. No preference was specified for left or right lateral decubitus positioning, allowing flexibility based on patient comfort and surgical requirements.
BEHAVIORALSemirecumbent positioning
Patients in the semi-recumbent position were placed in the bed and the head of the bed was raised by 30 °, allowing flexibility based on patient comfort and surgical requirements.
Sponsors
Yuhu Ma
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Patients aged 18 or above and 80 or below who received general anesthesia and intubation
Exclusion criteria
Inclusion criteria: \- Patients aged 18 years and above, and 80 years and below, who received general anesthesia and intubation;
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Incidence of hypoxaemia | Within 24 hours after the surgery was completed | Defined as any occurrence of oxygen saturation (SpO2) ≤90% for at least five seconds during the initial 10 minute period after positioning. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| incidence of severe hypoxaemia | Within 24 hours after the surgery was completed | oxyhemoglobin saturation ≤85% |
| Lowest oxygen saturation | Within 24 hours after the surgery was completed | Defined as the oxygenation nadir during 10 minutes of continuous measurement. |
| Rrequency of airway rescue interventions | Within 24 hours after the surgery was completed | Increased oxygen flow, jaw thrust manoeuvre, mask ventilation |
| wound pain | Perioperative/Periprocedural | VAS scale was used to measure pain intensity. The VAS uses a 10 cm line with endpoint descriptors such as 'no pain' marked at the left end of the line and 'worst pain imaginable' marked at the right end. A VAS score between 4-7 represents mild pain, a score between 4-7 represents moderate pain and a score between 8-10 represents severe pain. |
| Adverse events | Perioperative/Periprocedural | hypotension, arrhythmia, and some other adverse events. |
| Duration of stay in the post-anaesthesia care | Perioperative/Periprocedural | Duration of stay in the post-anaesthesia care |
Contacts
Primary ContactYuhu Ma, Master
Outcome results
None listed