International Journal of Tropical Medicine
ISSN: Online 1818-779XISSN: Print 1816-3319
154
Views
19
Downloads
Abstract
The heightened focus on Enhanced Recovery Protocols (ERPs) has significantly contributed to advancing postoperative outcomes. Despite their widespread application, the utilization of ERPs in Caesarean Sections (CS) remains a topic under continual investigation. This investigation seeks to evaluate the influence of diverse anaesthesia techniques on the efficacy of ERPs for CS. A prospective randomized study was executed, involving a cohort of 34 pregnant women undergoing elective CS. The participants were stratified into two groups, each comprising 17 individuals. Group G underwent general anaesthesia (GA), while Group R received regional anaesthesia (RA). Both groups were subjected to ERPs encompassing preoperative education, optimized pain management, early mobilization and prompt initiation of oral intake. Comparative analysis of postoperative outcomes, including the duration of hospital stay, pain assessments, and incidence of complications, was conducted between the two groups. Patients in Group R (RA) exhibited a significantly reduced duration of hospitalization when contrasted with Group G (GA). Furthermore, pain scores at 24‐48 hrs postoperatively were notably lower in Group R. However, the rates of complications did not exhibit significant disparities between the two groups. The integration of regional anaesthesia into an ERP demonstrates a favourable impact on post‐ Caesarean Section recovery. This association is underscored by diminished hospital stays and enhanced pain management when compared to the use of general anaesthesia. Nevertheless, further investigations with larger sample sizes are imperative to validate these observations and refine anaesthesia strategies within the framework of ERPs for CS.
How to cite this article:
Ekta Singh, Priyanka Dhankhar, Anita Birda and Akanksha Joon. The Significance of Anaesthesia in Advancing Recovery Protocols for Caesarean Births: A Prospective Randomised Study.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36478/10.59218/makijtm.2023.4.59.62
URL: https://www.makhillpublications.co/view-article/1816-3319/10.59218/makijtm.2023.4.59.62