Meltem Aktay İnal1, Sedef Gülçin Ural1, Hamiyet Şenol Çakmak2, Mahmut Arslan3, Reyhan Polat4. 1. Clinic of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Osmaniye State Hospital, Osmaniye, Turkey. 2. Clinic of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Samsun Gynaecology and Child Diseases Hospital, Samsun, Turkey. 3. Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Kahramanmaraş Sütçü İmam University School of Medicine, Kahramanmaraş, Turkey. 4. Clinic of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Dışkapı Yıldırım Beyazıt Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim is to investigate the attitudes of anaesthesiologists working in Turkey on perioperative temperature monitoring. METHODS: The questionnaire comprised 25 questions. Data were obtained through the completion of the questionnaire by hand or via the web. RESULTS: Two hundred and four questionnaires were evaluated. Most physicians were working in government hospitals. We determined that 26% of physicians often use temperature monitoring and that physicians who works in university hospitals are significantly more common monitor the body temperature. There are different approachs on core temperature. The skin/axilla was the most preferred monitoring site; forced-air warming devices were the most common preferred heating systems. New-borns were the most commonly monitored group, and the Turkish Anaesthesiology and Reanimation Society guideline was the most commonly used reference. Physicians working in university or private hospitals were significantly more able to adjust the operating room temperature on demand. CONCLUSION: There are different applications to prevent perioperative hypothermia. Although physicians are aware of the effects of anaesthesia on hypothermia and the contribution of hypothermia to complications, this awareness was not enough for them to make temperature monitoring a routine practice. To make temperature monitoring a standard practice, we believe that more studies should be conducted and that this issue needs to be more frequently addressed in congresses, anaesthesia conferences and particularly in residency training clinics.
OBJECTIVE: The aim is to investigate the attitudes of anaesthesiologists working in Turkey on perioperative temperature monitoring. METHODS: The questionnaire comprised 25 questions. Data were obtained through the completion of the questionnaire by hand or via the web. RESULTS: Two hundred and four questionnaires were evaluated. Most physicians were working in government hospitals. We determined that 26% of physicians often use temperature monitoring and that physicians who works in university hospitals are significantly more common monitor the body temperature. There are different approachs on core temperature. The skin/axilla was the most preferred monitoring site; forced-air warming devices were the most common preferred heating systems. New-borns were the most commonly monitored group, and the Turkish Anaesthesiology and Reanimation Society guideline was the most commonly used reference. Physicians working in university or private hospitals were significantly more able to adjust the operating room temperature on demand. CONCLUSION: There are different applications to prevent perioperative hypothermia. Although physicians are aware of the effects of anaesthesia on hypothermia and the contribution of hypothermia to complications, this awareness was not enough for them to make temperature monitoring a routine practice. To make temperature monitoring a standard practice, we believe that more studies should be conducted and that this issue needs to be more frequently addressed in congresses, anaesthesia conferences and particularly in residency training clinics.