• 1

    Johnston G, Eastment J, Wood J, et al. The confidential enquiry into perioperative equine fatalities (CEPEF): mortality results phases 1 and 2. Vet Anaesth Analg 2002;29:159170.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Herthel D. Systems for recovery from anesthesia. In:Nixon A, ed.Equine fracture repair. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co, 1996;339342.

  • 3

    McMurphy R. Systems for recovery from anesthesia. In:White N, Moore J, ed.Current techniques in equine surgery and lameness. 2nd ed.Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co, 1998;1315.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Sullivan EK, Klein LV, Richardson DW, et al. Use of a poolraft system for recovery of horses from general anesthesia: 393 horses (1984–2000). J Am Vet Med Assoc 2002;221:10141018.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Tidwell SA, Schneider RK, Ragle CA, et al. Use of a hydropool system to recover horses after general anesthesia: 60 cases. Vet Surg 2002;31:455461.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Driessen B. Assisted recovery in horses awakening from general anesthesia. In:Steffey EP, ed.Recent advances in anesthetic management of large domestic animals. International Veterinary Information Service Web site. Available at: www.ivis.org/advances/Steffey_Anesthesia/driessen3/chapter.asp?LA=1. Accessed Jan 19, 2006.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Muir W, Hubbell J. Preoperative evaluation of the horse. In:Muir W, Hubbell J, ed.Equine anesthesia: monitoring and emergency therapy. St Louis: Mosby Year Book Inc, 1991;120.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Richter MC, Bayly WM, Keegan RD, et al. Cardiopulmonary function in horses during anesthetic recovery in a hydropool. Am J Vet Res 2001;62:19031910.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Comparison of recoveries from anesthesia of horses placed on a rapidly inflating-deflating air pillow or the floor of a padded stall

View More View Less
  • 1 Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506.
  • | 2 Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506.
  • | 3 Department of Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506.
  • | 4 College of Statistics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523.

Abstract

Objective—To compare recoveries from anesthesia of horses placed on a conventional padded stall floor or on a specially designed air pillow.

Design—Prospective study.

Animals—409 horses (> 1 year old) that were anesthetized for surgical procedures during a 37-month period.

Procedures—By random allocation, horses were allowed to recover from anesthesia in either a foammat–padded recovery stall or an identical recovery stall equipped with a rapidly inflating-deflating air pillow. All recoveries were videotaped for subsequent analysis by an independent evaluator. Times to first movement, first attempt to attain sternal recumbency, attainment of sternal recumbency, first attempt to stand, and successful standing were recorded. The numbers of attempts before achieving sternal recumbency and standing were counted, and scores for quality of standing and overall recovery were assigned. Recovery-related variables were compared between groups.

Results—Compared with horses allowed to recover in a conventional manner, horses that recovered from anesthesia on the air pillow had a significantly longer rest period before attempting to attain sternal recumbency and rise to standing. Once the pillow was deflated, horses were able to stand after significantly fewer attempts and the quality of their standing was significantly better. Between the 2 groups of horses, there was no significant difference in overall recovery quality scores. The air pillow and padded floor systems were equally safe.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that use of a rapidly inflating-deflating air pillow promotes a longer period of recumbency and a better quality of standing after anesthesia in horses.

Abstract

Objective—To compare recoveries from anesthesia of horses placed on a conventional padded stall floor or on a specially designed air pillow.

Design—Prospective study.

Animals—409 horses (> 1 year old) that were anesthetized for surgical procedures during a 37-month period.

Procedures—By random allocation, horses were allowed to recover from anesthesia in either a foammat–padded recovery stall or an identical recovery stall equipped with a rapidly inflating-deflating air pillow. All recoveries were videotaped for subsequent analysis by an independent evaluator. Times to first movement, first attempt to attain sternal recumbency, attainment of sternal recumbency, first attempt to stand, and successful standing were recorded. The numbers of attempts before achieving sternal recumbency and standing were counted, and scores for quality of standing and overall recovery were assigned. Recovery-related variables were compared between groups.

Results—Compared with horses allowed to recover in a conventional manner, horses that recovered from anesthesia on the air pillow had a significantly longer rest period before attempting to attain sternal recumbency and rise to standing. Once the pillow was deflated, horses were able to stand after significantly fewer attempts and the quality of their standing was significantly better. Between the 2 groups of horses, there was no significant difference in overall recovery quality scores. The air pillow and padded floor systems were equally safe.

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results suggested that use of a rapidly inflating-deflating air pillow promotes a longer period of recumbency and a better quality of standing after anesthesia in horses.

Contributor Notes

Supported by the College of Veterinary Medicine, Kansas State University.

Presented at the 20th Annual Meeting of the American College of Veterinary Anesthesiologists, Atlanta, October 1995.

Address correspondence to Dr. Ray-Miller.