Elevation of a patient’s trunk and legs does not influence length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit

Authors

  • Otávio Omati Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo
  • Fábio Ely Martins Benseñor Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo
  • Joaquim Edson Vieira Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo

Keywords:

Anesthesia, Supine position, Anesthesia recovery period, Position modalities, General anesthesia

Abstract

CONTEXT: Patient recovery time after anesthesia depends on problem-oriented monitoring and individual assessment. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the influence of patient positioning on post-anesthesia recovery time. TYPE OF STUDY: Retrospective. SETTING: Post-anesthesia care unit, Hospital das Clínicas, São Paulo. METHODS: Data were obtained from patients recovering from anesthesia in a supine horizontal position or with their trunk and legs elevated at 30 degrees. Data were recorded every 30 minutes. The start time was considered to be the admission to the unit, and the final measurement was taken when the patient reached an Aldrete-Kroulik index of 10. The length of time until discharge was recorded. RESULTS: 442 patients recovering after general (n = 274) or regional anesthesia (n = 168) were assigned to be kept in a supine position or with their trunk and legs elevated. There was no difference in the medians for non-parametric results, between supine position (75 min, n = 229) and trunk and legs elevated (70 min, n = 213); p = 0.729. Patients recovered faster from regional anesthesia with trunk and legs elevated (70 min) than in the supine position (84.5 min), although not significantly (p = 0.097). There was no difference between patients recovering from general anesthesia, no matter the positioning (70 min; p = 0.493). DISCUSSION: Elevated legs may supposedly improve venous return and cardiac output since spinal anesthesia blocks sympathetic system and considering leg-raising has been shown to improve cardiac output from hipovolemia. Our findings did not support this hypothesis. Some limitations included a retrospective collection of data that did not allow randomization for recovery position and the unregistered duration of the exposure to the anesthetic drugs. CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in anesthesia recovery time in relation to positioning patients supinely or with trunk and legs elevated.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Otávio Omati, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo

MD. In-training resident physician, Anesthesiology Training Center, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Fábio Ely Martins Benseñor, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo

MD, PhD. Supervisor of post-anesthesia care unit, Anesthesiology Division, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Joaquim Edson Vieira, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo

MD, PhD, TSA-SP. Attending physician, Anesthesiology Division, Hospital das Clínicas, and collaborating professor, Internal Medicine Department, Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil. Holder of Superior Title in Anesthesiology (TSA-SP), Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology.

References

Tessler MJ, Mitmaker L, Wahba RM, Covert CR. Patient flow in the Post Anesthesia Care Unit: an observational study. Can J Anaesth. 1999;46(4):348-51.

Aldrete JA, Kroulik D. A postanesthetic recovery score. Anesth Analg. 1970;49(6):924-34.

Ponhold H, Vicenzi MN. Incidence of bradycardia during recovery from spinal anaesthesia: influence of patient position. Br J Anaesth. 1998;81(5):723-6.

Ward RJ, Bonica JJ, Freund FG, Akamatsu T, Danziger F, Englesson S. Epidural and subarachnoid anesthesia: Cardiovascular and respiratory effects. JAMA. 1965;191(4):275-8.

Kehlet H. Influence of regional anaesthesia on postoperative morbidity. Ann Chir Gynaecol. 1984;73(3):171-6.

McHugh GJ, Robinson BJ, Galletly DC. Leg elevation compared with Trendelenburg position: effects on autonomic cardiac control. Br J Anaesth. 1994;73(6):836-7.

Kyriakides ZS, Koukoulas A, Paraskevaidis IA, et al. Does passive leg raising increase cardiac performance? A study using Doppler echocardiography. Int J Cardiol. 1994;44(3):288-93.

Wong DH, O’Connor D, Tremper KK, Zacari J, Thompson P, Hill D. Changes in cardiac output after acute blood loss and position change in man. Crit Care Med. 1989;17(10):979-83.

Kilgour RD, Mansi JA, Williams PA. Cardiodynamic re- sponses during seated and supine recovery from supramaximal exercise. Can J Appl Physiol. 1995;20(1):52-64.

Bernards CM. Epidural and Spinal Anesthesia. In: Barash PG, Cullen BF, Stoelting RK, editors. Clinical Anesthesia, 4th Ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2001. Ch. 26, p: 1-43. Available at URL: http://pco.ovid.com/lrppco/index.html, accessed in 2003 (Aug 28).

Downloads

Published

2004-09-09

How to Cite

1.
Omati O, Benseñor FEM, Vieira JE. Elevation of a patient’s trunk and legs does not influence length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit. Sao Paulo Med J [Internet]. 2004 Sep. 9 [cited 2025 Jun. 14];122(5):213-6. Available from: https://periodicosapm.emnuvens.com.br/spmj/article/view/2530

Issue

Section

Original Article