Abstract
Purpose
Confirming the epidural space during epidural anesthesia relies mainly on feel and experience, which are difficult techniques for a trainee to learn. We designed an epidural simulator for trainees to experience loss of resistance (LOR) and various degrees of pressure resistance.
Methods
The simulator consists of a Perifix® LOR syringe and 1-, 5-, 10- and 50-mL syringes assembled by three-way stopcocks. A total of 89 anesthesiologists evaluated the simulator, given the choice of either the intermittent technique with air or continuous technique with saline. Sudden LOR and applicability of the simulator for training purposes were assessed using the numerical rating score (NRS). Pressure resistance at each lumbar structure was evaluated by the anesthesiologists using the intermittent technique with air.
Results
Seventy-four anesthesiologists used the intermittent technique with air and 15 used the continuous technique with saline. The NRSs for sudden LOR and the applicability for training purposes were 8 and 9 (median), respectively. The pressure resistance to a 50-mL syringe was regarded as the epidural space (odds ratio 602.3 for 5-mL syringe and 144.4 for 10-mL syringe) by 89 % of anesthesiologists using air for LOR. Resistance to the 10-mL syringe was most frequently considered as muscle, subcutaneous fat, or the interspinous ligament, while resistance to the 1-mL syringe was considered as the ligamentum flavum (odds ratio 2.3 for 5-mL syringe and 18.6 for 10-mL syringe).
Conclusions
Our epidural simulator is a simple, low-cost device that can be easily constructed. It was shown to provide valid haptic feedback as a promising tool for training novice anesthesiologists.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Konrad C, Schupfer G, Wietlisbach M, Gerber H. Learning manual skills in anesthesiology: is there a recommended number of cases for anesthetic procedures? Anesth Analg. 1998;86:635–9.
Kopacz DJ, Neal JM, Pollock JE. The regional anesthesia “learning curve”. What is the minimum number of epidural and spinal blocks to reach consistency? Reg Anesth. 1996;21:182–90.
Friedman Z, Siddiqui N, Katznelson R, Devito I, Bould MD, Naik V. Clinical impact of epidural anesthesia simulation on short- and long-term learning curve: high- versus low-fidelity model training. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2009;34:229–32.
Raj D, Williamson RM, Young D, Russell D. A simple epidural simulator: a blinded study assessing the ‘feel’ of loss of resistance in four fruits. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2013;30:405–8.
Uppal V, Kearns RJ, McGrady EM. Evaluation of M43B Lumbar puncture simulator-II as a training tool for identification of the epidural space and lumbar puncture. Anaesthesia. 2011;66:493–6.
Sawada A, Kii N, Yoshikawa Y, Yamakage M. Epidrum((R)): a new device to identify the epidural space with an epidural Tuohy needle. J Anesth. 2012;26:292–5.
Samhan YM, El-Sabae HH, Khafagy HF, Maher MA. A pilot study to compare epidural identification and catheterization using a saline-filled syringe versus a continuous hydrostatic pressure system. J Anesth. 2013;27:607–10.
Capogna G, Stirparo S, Caniggia S. Evaluation of a new training device to simulate the epidural and subarachnoid spaces for neuraxial anesthesia techniques. Minerva Anestesiol. 2013;79:385–90.
Leighton BL. A greengrocer’s model of the epidural space. Anesthesiology. 1989;70:368–9.
Russell R, Douglas J. Controversies: loss of resistance to saline is better than air for obstetric epidurals. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2001;10:3302–6.
Wantman A, Hancox N, Howell PR. Techniques for identifying the epidural space: a survey of practice amongst anaesthetists in the UK. Anaesthesia. 2006;61:370–5.
Evron S, Sessler D, Sadan O, Boaz M, Glezerman M, Ezri T. Identification of the epidural space: loss of resistance with air, lidocaine, or the combination of air and lidocaine. Anesth Analg. 2004;99:245–50.
Grondin LS, Nelson K, Ross V, Aponte O, Lee S, Pan PH. Success of spinal and epidural labor analgesia: comparison of loss of resistance technique using air versus saline in combined spinal-epidural labor analgesia technique. Anesthesiology. 2009;111:165–72.
Schier R, Guerra D, Aguilar J, Pratt GF, Hernandez M, Boddu K, Riedel B. Epidural space identification: a meta-analysis of complications after air versus liquid as the medium for loss of resistance. Anesth Analg. 2009;109:2012–21.
Devitt JH, Kurrek MM, Cohen MM, Cleave-Hogg D. The validity of performance assessments using simulation. Anesthesiology. 2001;95:36–42.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank all of their colleagues at Asan Medical Center and Kyungpook National University Hospital who provided their support for this study and Nayoung Kim, BS (Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Asan Medical Center, Seoul, Korea) for statistical consultation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
No conflicts of interest.
About this article
Cite this article
Jeong, SM., Choi, J.M., Kim, J.H. et al. A proposal of a simple epidural simulator for training novice anesthesiologists. J Anesth 30, 591–595 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-016-2182-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-016-2182-5