Influence of different types of recovery positions on perfusion indices of the forearm

"Tri Malleolar Ankle Fracture Fixation in a Modified Lateral Position – Tips and Techniques"

“…In this technique, we have modified the prone and lateral position in a way that provides proper prone access to the surgeon and the patient is lateral in the upper body. The benefit is avoiding the complications associated with prone position [3]. Similar positioning has been described earlier for Achilles tendon surgery [4,5], but we have been successfully utilizing this positioning technique for selected tri malleolar ankle fractures with good results.…”

"Tri Malleolar Ankle Fracture Fixation in a Modified Lateral Position – Tips and Techniques"

“…In this technique, we have modified the prone and lateral position in a way that provides proper prone access to the surgeon and the patient is lateral in the upper body. The benefit is avoiding the complications associated with prone position [3]. Similar positioning has been described earlier for Achilles tendon surgery [4,5], but we have been successfully utilizing this positioning technique for selected tri malleolar ankle fractures with good results.…”

The impact of different recovery positions on the perfusion of the lower forearm and comfort: A cross-over randomized controlled trial

“…Three previous studies did not compare these two positions, but focused on comparing a semi-prone position, halfway between a lateral and a prone position, with the lower arm behind the person, and the lateral recovery position with arms bent. 4 , 8 , 9 Two of these studies suggest that the semi-prone position shows less problems of arterial perfusion and venous drainage than the lateral position with arms bent. 4 , 9 However, in the third study it was shown that comfort and ease of placing a person in the recovery position was better in the position with arms bent, 8 which remained the preferred and recommended position in many guidelines between 2000 and 2020.…”

“… 4 , 8 , 9 Two of these studies suggest that the semi-prone position shows less problems of arterial perfusion and venous drainage than the lateral position with arms bent. 4 , 9 However, in the third study it was shown that comfort and ease of placing a person in the recovery position was better in the position with arms bent, 8 which remained the preferred and recommended position in many guidelines between 2000 and 2020.…”

“…In our cross-over study the order of the positions was randomized, which was not the case in two of the three previous studies that compared different recovery positions. 4 , 8 In addition, our study has several other methodological strengths compared to existing research: a sample size calculation was conducted (to allow precise and accurate conclusions), data were normalized to the preceding supine position (which was also done by Rathgeber et al 9 ), and data were corrected for multiple outcome testing.…”

A Modified Recovery Position

“…The most commonly used recovery position (How position), advocated in the 1992 UK Resuscitation Guidelines was modified in the 1997 guidelines based on advisory statements issued by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) (2,4). There was much debate about the change, which was based on the potential dangers of reduced perfusion, neurapraxia and venous congestion in the dependant arm (5,6). Doxey proposed that rescuers preferred the 1992 recovery position as it was easier to perform and more comfortable for the patient (7).…”

"Tri Malleolar Ankle Fracture Fixation in a Modified Lateral Position – Tips and Techniques"

“…In this technique, we have modified the prone and lateral position in a way that provides proper prone access to the surgeon and the patient is lateral in the upper body. The benefit is avoiding the complications associated with prone position [3]. Similar positioning has been described earlier for Achilles tendon surgery [4,5], but we have been successfully utilizing this positioning technique for selected tri malleolar ankle fractures with good results.…”

The impact of different recovery positions on the perfusion of the lower forearm and comfort: A cross-over randomized controlled trial

“…Three previous studies did not compare these two positions, but focused on comparing a semi-prone position, halfway between a lateral and a prone position, with the lower arm behind the person, and the lateral recovery position with arms bent. 4 , 8 , 9 Two of these studies suggest that the semi-prone position shows less problems of arterial perfusion and venous drainage than the lateral position with arms bent. 4 , 9 However, in the third study it was shown that comfort and ease of placing a person in the recovery position was better in the position with arms bent, 8 which remained the preferred and recommended position in many guidelines between 2000 and 2020.…”

“… 4 , 8 , 9 Two of these studies suggest that the semi-prone position shows less problems of arterial perfusion and venous drainage than the lateral position with arms bent. 4 , 9 However, in the third study it was shown that comfort and ease of placing a person in the recovery position was better in the position with arms bent, 8 which remained the preferred and recommended position in many guidelines between 2000 and 2020.…”

“…In our cross-over study the order of the positions was randomized, which was not the case in two of the three previous studies that compared different recovery positions. 4 , 8 In addition, our study has several other methodological strengths compared to existing research: a sample size calculation was conducted (to allow precise and accurate conclusions), data were normalized to the preceding supine position (which was also done by Rathgeber et al 9 ), and data were corrected for multiple outcome testing.…”

A Modified Recovery Position

“…The most commonly used recovery position (How position), advocated in the 1992 UK Resuscitation Guidelines was modified in the 1997 guidelines based on advisory statements issued by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) (2,4). There was much debate about the change, which was based on the potential dangers of reduced perfusion, neurapraxia and venous congestion in the dependant arm (5,6). Doxey proposed that rescuers preferred the 1992 recovery position as it was easier to perform and more comfortable for the patient (7).…”

"Tri Malleolar Ankle Fracture Fixation in a Modified Lateral Position – Tips and Techniques"

“…In this technique, we have modified the prone and lateral position in a way that provides proper prone access to the surgeon and the patient is lateral in the upper body. The benefit is avoiding the complications associated with prone position [3]. Similar positioning has been described earlier for Achilles tendon surgery [4,5], but we have been successfully utilizing this positioning technique for selected tri malleolar ankle fractures with good results.…”

The impact of different recovery positions on the perfusion of the lower forearm and comfort: A cross-over randomized controlled trial

“…Three previous studies did not compare these two positions, but focused on comparing a semi-prone position, halfway between a lateral and a prone position, with the lower arm behind the person, and the lateral recovery position with arms bent. 4 , 8 , 9 Two of these studies suggest that the semi-prone position shows less problems of arterial perfusion and venous drainage than the lateral position with arms bent. 4 , 9 However, in the third study it was shown that comfort and ease of placing a person in the recovery position was better in the position with arms bent, 8 which remained the preferred and recommended position in many guidelines between 2000 and 2020.…”

“… 4 , 8 , 9 Two of these studies suggest that the semi-prone position shows less problems of arterial perfusion and venous drainage than the lateral position with arms bent. 4 , 9 However, in the third study it was shown that comfort and ease of placing a person in the recovery position was better in the position with arms bent, 8 which remained the preferred and recommended position in many guidelines between 2000 and 2020.…”

“…In our cross-over study the order of the positions was randomized, which was not the case in two of the three previous studies that compared different recovery positions. 4 , 8 In addition, our study has several other methodological strengths compared to existing research: a sample size calculation was conducted (to allow precise and accurate conclusions), data were normalized to the preceding supine position (which was also done by Rathgeber et al 9 ), and data were corrected for multiple outcome testing.…”

A Modified Recovery Position

“…The most commonly used recovery position (How position), advocated in the 1992 UK Resuscitation Guidelines was modified in the 1997 guidelines based on advisory statements issued by the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) (2,4). There was much debate about the change, which was based on the potential dangers of reduced perfusion, neurapraxia and venous congestion in the dependant arm (5,6). Doxey proposed that rescuers preferred the 1992 recovery position as it was easier to perform and more comfortable for the patient (7).…”