Dilek Ömür1, Hasan Ali Kiraz2, Hasan Şahin2, Hüseyin Toman2, Berna Uyan2, Serpil Ekin2, Volkan Hancı1. 1. Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey. 2. Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University Faculty of Medicine, Çanakkale, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Although succinylcholine (SCh) has side effects, it is among the most commonly used muscle relaxants for rapid induction because of the faster onset of its effects and short effect duration. However, there is no information regarding the frequency of use of SCh by anaesthetists in Turkey. This study aims to investigate the use of SCh by anaesthetists working in Turkey. METHODS: A web-based survey form was sent by e-mail to anaesthetists working in Turkey. The form comprised a total of 24 questions. RESULTS: E-mails were sent to a total of 1882 addresses at two separate times. E-mail replies were received from 433 (23%) anaesthetists. Based on those who responded to the survey, 54.27% anaesthetists routinely used SCh for adult elective cases, 29.33% for paediatric elective cases and 74.13% for emergency cases. In adult elective cases, SCh was most frequently chosen for caesarean section (20.5%), and in paediatric elective and emergency cases, SCh was chosen most frequently because difficult intubation was expected (31.3 and 21.4%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our study reveals that SCh is still widely used by anaesthetists in Turkey. Majority of physicians who participated our survey were aware of the side effects; however, they reported using SCh in certain special situations. It is evident that creation of a standard care guide for departments is essential. The first stage of creating a standard care guide is to analyse and document the current application. With this aim, more wide-ranging advanced studies should be completed.
OBJECTIVE: Although succinylcholine (SCh) has side effects, it is among the most commonly used muscle relaxants for rapid induction because of the faster onset of its effects and short effect duration. However, there is no information regarding the frequency of use of SCh by anaesthetists in Turkey. This study aims to investigate the use of SCh by anaesthetists working in Turkey. METHODS: A web-based survey form was sent by e-mail to anaesthetists working in Turkey. The form comprised a total of 24 questions. RESULTS: E-mails were sent to a total of 1882 addresses at two separate times. E-mail replies were received from 433 (23%) anaesthetists. Based on those who responded to the survey, 54.27% anaesthetists routinely used SCh for adult elective cases, 29.33% for paediatric elective cases and 74.13% for emergency cases. In adult elective cases, SCh was most frequently chosen for caesarean section (20.5%), and in paediatric elective and emergency cases, SCh was chosen most frequently because difficult intubation was expected (31.3 and 21.4%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Our study reveals that SCh is still widely used by anaesthetists in Turkey. Majority of physicians who participated our survey were aware of the side effects; however, they reported using SCh in certain special situations. It is evident that creation of a standard care guide for departments is essential. The first stage of creating a standard care guide is to analyse and document the current application. With this aim, more wide-ranging advanced studies should be completed.