Résumé
Hypothesis: Wide awake local anesthesia with no tourniquet (WALANT) and office-based procedures are used in hand surgery. There are limited literature data on patient satisfaction when comparing methods of anesthesia and location of surgery.Methods: We conducted a retrospective single-surgeon study with patient reported satisfaction in three groups. We compared patient impressions of anesthesia type; WALANT vs loco regional anesthesia plus sedation. We also compared satisfaction in three surgery settings; office surgery vs hospital ambulatory minor procedure room vs. main operating room. Group 1 office surgery patients had ultrasound guided surgery with WALANT. Group 2 main operating room surgery patients also had ultrasound guided surgery with WALANT. Group 3 main operating room patients had endoscopic surgery with sedation and a tourniquet. Each group had 30 patients with a minimum follow up of 2 months. We measured overall satisfaction, satisfaction with the organization of care, satisfaction with the administration of anesthesia, and satisfaction with the quality of anesthesia. We also collected secondary data on the resolution of the neuropathic symptoms.Results: Procedures performed in an office-based setting showed higher rates of patient satisfaction when compared to the ambulatory day surgery setting. WALANT anesthesia also showed significantly higher rates of patient satisfaction on a numerical analog scale when compared to sedation based on, irrespective of the surgical setting. All patients had resolution of their neuropathic symptoms regardless of the technique performed.Conclusion: We found that carpal tunnel releases performed in an office-based setting produces superior patient satisfaction. WALANT anesthesia also provides improved patient satisfaction when compared to sedation and monitoring techniques, irrespective of the surgical setting and location. Carpal tunnel release with WALANT in an office-based setting is better for patient comfort and satisfaction, with no evidence of lesser clinical outcomes at a short term follow up.Level of evidence: III.