Skip Navigation

British Journal of Anaesthesia 2009 103(1):130-132; doi:10.1093/bja/aep151
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Moen, V.
Right arrow Articles by Wildsmith, J. A.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Moen, V.
Right arrow Articles by Wildsmith, J. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Author [2009]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Board of Directors of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournal.org

Major complications of central neuraxial block: the Third National Audit Project: some comments and questions

V. Moen*, L. Irestedt and N. Dahlgren

Kalmar, Stockholm and Lund, Sweden

* E-mail: vibekem@ltkalmar.se

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Editor—The Third National Audit Project (NAP3) is the largest prospective study regarding the incidence of complications after central neuraxial blocks (CNBs) performed.1 All collaborators are to be congratulated with the success of this ambitious project. The numbers of patients and complications included are considerable, and highly reliable information was obtained.

Unfortunately, the impact of the results might be reduced by their presentation. Obstetric patients, well known to constitute a low-risk group, are included in the denominator, predictably reducing the incidence of complications. In accordance with the endpoints of the study (permanent damage or death), successfully treated complications are excluded from statistics presented in the abstract (and press release), also contributing to a lower incidence of complications. However, patient outcome is dependent on vigilance and suspicion of a complication, in turn largely based on the perceived probability of such a complication arising. The present study illustrates this relationship, as permanent damage . . . [Full Text of this Article]

T. M. Cook1,*, D. Counsell2 and J. A. Wildsmith3

1 Bath, UK
2 Wrexham, UK
3 Dundee, UK

* E-mail: tcook@rcoa.ac.uk


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?