| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
Department of Anesthesiology Perioperative and Pain Management Brigham & Womens Hospital Harvard Medical School Boston, MA
To the Editor:
I read with interest the suggestions of Dolinski and Gerancher (1) to facilitate patient positioning for neuraxial anesthetic techniques. In our practice, we frequently utilize methods that facilitate a pronounced curvature of the spine with limitation of patient movement; anecdotally we find that the lateral recumbent, fetal position offers less side-to-side motion, as well as the front-to-back motion common in the seated position.
Nonetheless, the potentially advantageous patient positions were obscured by the potentially detrimental mask position (i.e., covering neither nose nor mouth) of the anesthetist performing the block in Figure 1. Although bacterial meningitis is a rare sequelae of regional anesthesia, observational and case control studies have implicated health care providers, including anesthesiologists, as the source of infections (2,3). Moreover, laboratory evidence appears to corroborate the clinical value of surgical masks in preventing the transmission of infectious agents from the upper airway and limiting bacterial contamination of a surface (4).
The use of surgical masks during the placement of neuraxial techniques is far from uniform (5,6). However, given the available evidence on the relationship between oral commensal bacteria and iatrogenic meningitis, the use of surgical masks should be recommended and practiced.
References
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
B. Kaul, M. C. Vallejo, S. Ramanathan, G. L. Mandell, and R. G. Krohner Accidental Spinal Analgesia in the Presence of a Lumboperitoneal Shunt in an Obese Parturient Receiving Enoxaparin Therapy Anesth. Analg., August 1, 2002; 95(2): 441 - 443. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|