Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Lumbar Discectomy: Patient-Centered Analysis of Satisfaction with Anesthesia Service

<i>Background and Objectives:</i> Spinal (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) are both available for lumbar disc hernia (LDH) surgery. Patient satisfaction with anesthesia service is under-investigated and may help identify areas requiring improvement, leading to better care. <i>Materials and Methods:</i> A prospective, non-randomized, survey-based study was performed in patients who underwent LDH surgeries under SA or GA. Patients rated perioperative pain (preoperative and postoperative days (PODs) 0, 1, and 2) and satisfaction with perioperative care (10 questions) on a numeric rating scale (NRS) from 0 to 10, and an overall satisfaction score (OSS) was calculated; a patient discomfort questionnaire was also used. Study outcomes were pain scores, satisfaction with care, and discomfort reported by SA and GA patients. <i>Results:</i> In total, 209 completed questionnaires in the GA and SA groups (114 vs. 95) were available for final analysis. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. The proportion of patients with severe pain decreased from >80% preoperatively to 6% on POD2, and pain scores did not differ significantly between groups. Mean overall satisfaction scores (OSSs) were high: 9.71 (maximum OSS: 57% of cases) in the GA group, and 9.75 (maximum OSS: 53.7% of cases) in the SA group (<i>p</i> = 0.95). The ceiling effect of the patient satisfaction questionnaire had to be addressed. There was no association between the type of anesthesia and OSS. Sources of discomfort were similar between groups, except for oropharyngeal discomfort being more prevalent in the GA group (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Postoperative pain was reported as a source of discomfort by >50% of patients in both the SA and GA groups. Regression analysis identified anxiety and nude body exposure as preoperative factors associated with decreased satisfaction with anesthesia. Postoperative factors associated with submaximal satisfaction were PONV, cold, mouth dryness, and pain. Pain on POD 0 did not influence overall patient satisfaction. An association was only found when pain persisted on POD 1 and POD 2. <i>Conclusions:</i> No significant differences between the two anesthesia methods were found. Patient information, anxiety management, and privacy protection are important for patient satisfaction. In the postoperative period, pain and PONV management must be equally addressed, irrespective of the anesthesia method used. Further efforts to develop optimal tools for patient satisfaction assessment are necessary.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicina
Published
2026-03-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina62030524
Primary Topic
Anesthesia and Pain Management
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Lumbar Discectomy: Patient-Centered Analysis of Satisfaction with Anesthesia Service

Marius Rimaitis, Andrius Macas, Kęstutis Rimaitis, Diana Bilskienė et al.
Medicina
Anesthesia and Pain Management
article

Spinal Versus General Anesthesia for Lumbar Discectomy: Patient-Centered Analysis of Satisfaction with Anesthesia Service

Marius Rimaitis, Andrius Macas, Kęstutis Rimaitis, Diana Bilskienė, Indrė Cirkelė
article en

Abstract

<i>Background and Objectives:</i> Spinal (SA) and general anesthesia (GA) are both available for lumbar disc hernia (LDH) surgery. Patient satisfaction with anesthesia service is under-investigated and may help identify areas requiring improvement, leading to better care. <i>Materials and Methods:</i> A prospective, non-randomized, survey-based study was performed in patients who underwent LDH surgeries under SA or GA. Patients rated perioperative pain (preoperative and postoperative days (PODs) 0, 1, and 2) and satisfaction with perioperative care (10 questions) on a numeric rating scale (NRS) from 0 to 10, and an overall satisfaction score (OSS) was calculated; a patient discomfort questionnaire was also used. Study outcomes were pain scores, satisfaction with care, and discomfort reported by SA and GA patients. <i>Results:</i> In total, 209 completed questionnaires in the GA and SA groups (114 vs. 95) were available for final analysis. Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between the two groups. The proportion of patients with severe pain decreased from >80% preoperatively to 6% on POD2, and pain scores did not differ significantly between groups. Mean overall satisfaction scores (OSSs) were high: 9.71 (maximum OSS: 57% of cases) in the GA group, and 9.75 (maximum OSS: 53.7% of cases) in the SA group (<i>p</i> = 0.95). The ceiling effect of the patient satisfaction questionnaire had to be addressed. There was no association between the type of anesthesia and OSS. Sources of discomfort were similar between groups, except for oropharyngeal discomfort being more prevalent in the GA group (<i>p</i> < 0.05). Postoperative pain was reported as a source of discomfort by >50% of patients in both the SA and GA groups. Regression analysis identified anxiety and nude body exposure as preoperative factors associated with decreased satisfaction with anesthesia. Postoperative factors associated with submaximal satisfaction were PONV, cold, mouth dryness, and pain. Pain on POD 0 did not influence overall patient satisfaction. An association was only found when pain persisted on POD 1 and POD 2. <i>Conclusions:</i> No significant differences between the two anesthesia methods were found. Patient information, anxiety management, and privacy protection are important for patient satisfaction. In the postoperative period, pain and PONV management must be equally addressed, irrespective of the anesthesia method used. Further efforts to develop optimal tools for patient satisfaction assessment are necessary.

MedicinaVol. 62(3)
Lithuanian University of Health Sciences (LT)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 25%
Anesthesia and Pain Management
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.