Computerized 4-choice reaction time test for the measurement of psychomotor recovery after general anesthesia

The recovery of patients after general anesthesia is usually estimated by using clinical scores. Since there is a lack of objective methods for assessing psychomotor recovery, the aim of this study was to evaluate three psychological tests for this purpose. Patients, scheduled for ambulatory gynecol...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical monitoring and computing 2020-08, Vol.34 (4), p.833-841
Main Authors: Usichenko, Taras I., Städing, Danika, Boesche, Michael, Janner, Henriette, Hesse, Thomas, Lehmann, Robert, Pavlovic, Dragan, Nowak, Andreas
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Anesthesia
Anesthesiology
Computer memory
Critical Care Medicine
Data processing
Discharge
Fatigue tests
Health Sciences
Intensive
Medicine
Medicine & Public Health
Memory
Original Research
Psychological tests
Reaction time
Recovery (Medical)
Statistics for Life Sciences
Surgery
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The recovery of patients after general anesthesia is usually estimated by using clinical scores. Since there is a lack of objective methods for assessing psychomotor recovery, the aim of this study was to evaluate three psychological tests for this purpose. Patients, scheduled for ambulatory gynecological surgery, underwent 3 standard psychological tests before (T1), 15 min after the surgery (T2) and on discharge from the recovery room (T3). The tests used were Wechsler memory scale ( test 1 , working memory capacity), d2—test ( test 2 , concentration endurance) and computer-based 4-choice-reaction time (4CRT, test 3 , reaction time) as well as Postanesthesia Discharge Scoring System (PADSS). The same test battery was used in healthy female volunteers, all test results were compared at the different time points. In 109 patients, working memory capacity and concentration ( tests 1 and 2 ) decreased, the reaction time ( test 3 ) was prolonged at T2 in comparison with T1 and T3 (P 
ISSN:1387-1307
1573-2614
DOI:10.1007/s10877-019-00355-3