Despite the significant growth in the South Asian population in the United States over the past 2 decades, the experiences of South Asian adolescents have remained largely invisible. Guided by a socioecological perspective (American Psychological Association, 2012; García Coll & Marks, 2012), this study examined South Asian adolescents' experiences of acculturative stress and approaches to coping with this stress across home and school contexts. A semistructured interview was completed by 16 participants (9 girls, 7 boys; ages 14-18 years) from different South Asian backgrounds, attending an urban public high school in the Northeastern part of the United States. Conventional content analysis was used to analyze the interview data, and revealed 4 broad categories or domains related to participants' experiences as young South Asians in the U.S. These domains include the following: (a) Connection to family, community, and heritage; (b) Challenges to acculturation; (c) Stress accompanying the navigation across cultural contexts; and (d) Coping and resilience. Participants' narratives reflect acculturative stress experienced in home and school contexts which can inhibit psychological well-being and bicultural identity development. The findings have important implications for culturally informed research, intervention, and policy. (PsycINFO Database Record

The quest for searching newer and safer anesthetic agents has always been one of the primary needs in anesthesiology practice. Levobupivacaine, the pure S (−)-enantiomer of bupivacaine, has strongly emerged as a safer alternative for regional anesthesia than its racemic sibling, bupivacaine. Levobupivacaine has been found to be equally efficacious as bupivacaine, but with a superior pharmacokinetic profile. Clinically, levobupivacaine has been observed to be well-tolerated in regional anesthesia techniques both after bolus administration and continuous post-operative infusion. The incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) is rare when it is administered correctly. Most ADRs are related to faulty administration technique (resulting in systemic exposure) or pharmacological effects of anesthesia; however, allergic reactions can also occur rarely. The available literary evidence in anesthesia practice indicates that levobupivacaine and bupivacaine produce comparable surgical sensory block, similar adverse side effects and provision of similar labor analgesia with good comparable maternal and fetal outcome. The present review aims to discuss the pharmacokinetic and pharmacological essentials of the safer profile of levobupivacaine as well as to discuss the scope and indications of levobupivacaine based on current clinical evidence.

No abstract

Background and Aim:Induced hypotension limits intra-operative blood loss to provide better visibility of the surgical field and diminishes the incidence of major complications during functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS). We aimed at comparing nitroglycerine, esmolol and dexmedetomidine for inducing controlled hypotension in patients undergoing FESS.Material and Methods:One hundred and fifty American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II adult patients undergoing FESS under general anesthesia were randomly allocated to three groups of 50 patients each. Group E received esmolol in a loading and maintenance dose of 1 mg/kg over 1 min and 0.5-1.0 mg/kg/h, respectively. Group D received a loading dose of dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg over 10 min followed by an infusion 0.5-1.0 μg/kg/h, and group N received nitroglycerine infusion at a dose of 0.5-2 μg/kg/min so as to maintain mean arterial pressure (MAP) between 60 and 70 mmHg in all the groups. The visibility of the surgical field was assessed by surgeon using Fromme and Boezaart scoring system. Hemodynamic variables, total intra-operative fentanyl consumption, emergence time and time to first analgesic request were recorded. Any side-effects were noted. The postoperative sedation was assessed using Ramsay Sedation Score.Result:The desired MAP (60-70 mmHg) could be achieved in all the three study groups albeit with titration of study drugs during intra-operative period. No significant intergroup difference was observed in Fromme's score during the intra-operative period. The mean total dose of fentanyl (μg/kg) used was found to be significantly lower in group D compared to groups E and N (1.2 ± 0.75 vs. 3.6 ± 1.3 and 2.9 ± 1.1 respectively). The mean heart rate was significantly lower in group D compared to groups E and N at all times of measurement (P < 0.05). The MAP was found to be significantly lower in group D compared to groups E and N after infusion of study drugs, after induction, just after intubation and 5 min after intubation (P < 0.05). The Ramsay Sedation Scores were significantly higher in group D (score 3 in 46%) when compared to group E (score 2 in 50%) and group N (score 2 in 54%) (P < 0.001). The emergence time was significantly lower in group E and group N compared to group D. Time to first analgesic request was significantly longer in group D.Conclusion:Dexmedetomidine and esmolol provided better hemodynamic stability and operative field visibility compared to nitroglycerin during FESS. Dexmedetomidine provides an additional benefit of reducing the analgesic requirements and providing postoperative sedation.

of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made.