Skip to main content
. 2017 Apr 7;2017(4):CD010807. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010807.pub2

Oberoi 2009.

Methods

  • Design: parallel‐group (2 arms)

  • Country: India

  • Multisite: no

  • Needle type design used: 25 G Quincke, 25 G Whitacre

  • Needle diameter used: 25 G

  • Procedure: anaesthesia

  • Number of attempts: unknown

  • Procedure: anaesthesia

  • Site of the puncture: unknown

  • Training level of those who administered the puncture: experienced anaesthesiologists

  • Median or paramedian technique: unknown

  • Type of anaesthetic: not reported

  • Patient position: unknown
Participants 1. 200 patients enrolled (obstetric female patients aged 20 to 35 belonging to ASA I undergoing elective or emergency lower segment caesarean section)
Patients randomized to:

  • 25 G Quincke (Q) (100)

  • 25 G Whitacre (W) (100)


2. Losses to follow‐up and exclusions were not reported
2. Main characteristics of patients:

  • Age (mean, SD): 25 G Quincke: 26.97, 3.8; 25 G Whitacre: 27.1, 4.22

  • Height (mean, SD): 25 G Quincke: 156.7, 4.31; 25 G Whitacre: 158.6, 3.94

  • Weight (mean, SD): 25 G Quincke: 63, 3.65; 25 G Whitacre: 65.1, 3.61
Interventions

  1. 25 G Quincke spinal needle group

  2. 25 G Whitacre spinal needle group
Outcomes Outcomes were not classified as primary or secondary

  1. PDPH

  2. Side effects

  3. Severity of PDPH: assessed with Corbey severity grading and VAS
Notes

  1. Trial registration: not stated

  2. Funder: not stated

  3. Role of funder: not stated

  4. A priori sample size estimation: no

  5. Conducted: not reported

  6. Declared conflicts of interest: no
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "The patients were randomly allocated to one of the two groups Q or W according to computer generated numbers". (page 420)
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk Insufficient information to score this item as low or high risk of bias
Blinding of participants (performance bias) Unclear risk Insufficient information to score this item as low or high risk of bias
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk Quote: "Post‐operatively, follow up was done up to 7 days after the surgery or till the time of discharge by an anaesthesiologist who had no knowledge of the spinal needle." (page 421)
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk No patients were lost to follow‐up
Selective reporting (reporting bias) High risk Severity of post‐dural puncture headache was assessed according to Corbey severity grading and visual analogue scale (VAS). This information is not reported.
Other bias Low risk No other biases were identified