الفهرس 
Introduction & Aim of the workOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 16 |  |  |
| | | from | 16 | | |
Abstract
This study was conducted at Minia University Hospital during the period from September 2014 to June 2015, the study involved 70 patients of either sex, aged 15-70 years old, ASA I & II and undergoing forearm surgery under supraclavicular brachial plexus block guided by a nerve stimulator.
This study was aiming to compare between classical approach and lateral approach for supraclavicular block of brachial plexus for upper limb surgeries in success rate and rate of incidence of complication.
Patients were randomly divided into two equal groups; group C (classical group, n=35) received 40 ml of mixture of lidocaine 2%, bupivacaine 0.5% and normal saline. group L (lateral group, n=35) received the same amount of local anesthetics.
The variables included: onset time of sensory and motor blocks, duration time of sensory and motor blocks, mean time taken for the procedure, patient satisfaction score, and tolerability to the tourniquet and adverse effects were recorded.
The results of this study found that ,there was a significant difference between onset of sensory and motor nerve block between group C and group L where there was a significant decrease in onset of block in group L when was compared to group C.
Also, there was insignificant difference in duration of sensory and motor block, although there was increase in duration of sensory and motor nerve block in group L when was compared to group C.
The was significant difference in mean time taken for the procedure between group C and group L in which the duration was shorter in group C than group L .
There was a significant difference Patient satisfaction score between group C and group L in which patient satisfaction score is better in group L than in group C.
There was insignificant difference in tourniquet tolerability and the incidence of complication between group C and group L, although the tourniquet tolerability is better in group L than in group C and the incidence of complication was occurred in group C while no complication was occurred in group L.