Hansdottir 2006.
Methods | Parallel RCT Ethics committee: the Human Ethics Committee of the Sahlgrenska Academy, Goteborg University, Goteborg, Sweden, approved the study protocol Informed consents: all participants gave written informed consent Site: Goteberg, Sweden Setting: university hospital Dates of data collection: from 1 April 2002 to 31 December 2003 Funding: support was provided solely from institutional and/or departmental sources Registration: unspecified |
|
Participants | 113 participants; mean age: 66.5 years; sex distribution: 37 females and 76 males Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Aspirin treatment was not considered a contraindication to placement of a thoracic epidural catheter |
|
Interventions |
Intervention
Comparator
Premedication: midazolam Induction and maintenance: propofol, remifentanil, and atracurium Surgery: CABG, valve procedures, or both with CPB using a membrane oxygenator |
|
Outcomes |
Relevant to this review
Others
|
|
Notes | Correspondence: email sent 16 March 2018; no reply Conflict of interest: not reported DOI: n/a |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Participants were randomly assigned the day before surgery to 1 of 2 regimens |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Low risk | Sealed envelopes |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | The infusion bag (250 mL) of the patient‐controlled analgesia pump was changed only once during the postoperative treatment period (72 h) by the nursing team, which was neither blinded to treatment nor involved in assessment of patients The decision to allow hospital discharge was made by the surgical team not blinded to treatment |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Atelectasis was defined as new area(s) of lobar or sublobar atelectatic consolidation with an air bronchogram by a radiologist blinded to treatment Evaluation of quality of recovery score, level of mobilization, pain, degree of sedation, lung function, and eligibility for hospital discharge was performed between 1:00 and 3:00 PM each day by either of two investigators. These investigators were blinded to the assigned treatment The blinded investigators were not involved in nursing of the participants Less than 5% of epidural participants revealed by mistake to the blinded observer the presence of the epidural catheter |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | 113 participants were randomized, 110 participants received allocated treatment, and 97 participants were eventually analysed |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | All results were reported |
Other bias | Unclear risk | Three participants were excluded because of inability to place the epidural catheter. In 1 of these participants, the catheter was positioned intradurally, and another participant did not co‐operate. A malfunctioning epidural catheter was considered in 7 participants after extubation. Three of these participants had the epidural catheter replaced in the ICU, and 4 were treated with intravenous patient‐controlled analgesia with morphine These 7 participants were analysed on an intention‐to‐treat basis Groups had similar demographic data, except for a higher incidence of off‐pump CABG in the epidural group and a longer cardiopulmonary bypass time in the systemic analgesia group |