Abstract

PICO question
 In horses undergoing general anaesthesia, does assistance with ropes result in better recoveries when compared to no assistance (‘free’ recovery)?
 
 Clinical bottom line
 Category of research question
 Treatment
 The number and type of study designs reviewed
 One randomised, non-blinded controlled trial and two retrospective cohort studies
 Strength of evidence
 Weak
 Outcomes reported
 The three studies reviewed arrive at different conclusions regarding the utility of rope assistance in recovery from general anaesthesia in horses, but examine very different populations. The randomised controlled trial provides weak evidence that rope assistance can shorten recovery and improve recovery quality in healthy (American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I–II) horses. One retrospective cohort study provides weak evidence that rope assistance confers a reduction in fatality in both healthy and sick horses. The other retrospective cohort study provides weak evidence that rope assistance confers no benefit to horses undergoing emergency colic surgery. Both assisted and unassisted groups in each study had fatalities and all studies reported complications related to the rope recovery system
 Conclusion
 Insufficient evidence is available to permit a full recommendation regarding rope assistance during recovery from general anaesthesia in horses. Rope assistance may improve recovery time and quality in some horses. The decision to perform a rope-assisted recovery must be made considering individual patient, team and clinic factors. Rope assistance cannot prevent fatalities in recovery
 
 How to apply this evidence in practice
 The application of evidence into practice should take into account multiple factors, not limited to: individual clinical expertise, patient’s circumstances and owners’ values, country, location or clinic where you work, the individual case in front of you, the availability of therapies and resources.
 Knowledge Summaries are a resource to help reinforce or inform decision making. They do not override the responsibility or judgement of the practitioner to do what is best for the animal in their care.
 

Highlights

  • Horses randomly allocated to recover from general anaesthesia with head-and-tail rope assistance or without assistance

  • Maintenance: isoflurane in oxygen with partial IV anaesthesia

  • Xylazine 0.2–0.25 mg/kg IV administered at appearance of nystagmus

Read more

Summary

Summary of the evidence

Population: Healthy adult horses (client-owned) undergoing general anaesthesia for elective surgical procedures presented to one private equine hospital. Horses randomly allocated to recover from general anaesthesia with head-and-tail rope assistance or without assistance. Assisted group (n=154): recovery in padded stall; 1 rope attached to noseband of purpose-made halter, 1 rope tied around tail; ropes threaded through diagonally positioned rings at 2.5 m height; ropes managed by 2-person team with experienced leader controlling head rope. Unassisted group (n=151): recovery in padded stall; no assistance provided. Horses in assisted group made fewer attempts to stand: (median) 1 attempt versus (median) 3 attempts in unassisted group. Duration of recovery was shorter in assisted group: (mean) 36 minutes versus (mean) 41 minutes in unassisted group. Quality of recovery was better in assisted group: (mean) 28 points versus (mean) 38 points in unassisted group.

Limitations:
Findings
Methodology Section
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call