Esophageal Calibration with Soft Orogasrtric Tube During Laparoscopic Nissen Fundoplication may Reduce Postoperative Transient Dysphagia

Gastroesophageal reflux is the most common benign disorder of the esophagus and laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication has become the standard surgical treatment for its treatment. In our area, where the use of bougie calibration is debatable, postoperative dysphagia is encountered often after this surgery although it is usually not permanent. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of using a soft silicone tube 39 F in diameter for esophageal calibration during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication on the incidence of postoperative dysphagia. We divided cases scheduled to undergo laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication between January 2009 and November 2010 into two groups, each consisting 25 patients. Esophageal calibration with a 39 F silicone orogastric tube was used for the first group while there was no operative calibration in the second group. The surgical duration was recorded; the presence and severity of the postoperative dysphagia was calculated by using a dysphagia severity scoring system during the 1-year postoperative follow-up. The dysphagia severity scores were significantly lower in group 1 than group 2 on the postoperative second day and at the end of the first week and first month. We did not find a significant difference at the end of the 6-month and first year. There was also no significant difference regarding surgery duration. The use of a soft orogastric tube 39 F in diameter for esophagus calibration during laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication has significantly decreased the incidence of postoperative transient dysphagia without affecting the duration of surgery. Although dysphagia gradually resolves in the majority of patients, a safe and easy calibration method for its prevention is worth developing, and we believe that the use of our method in larger series could be beneficial.     

Effects of Approach and Avoid Mindsets on Performance, Self-regulatory Cognition, and Affect in a Multi-task Environment

Despite numerous studies of approach- and avoidant mindsets, relatively little research has addressed the impact of such motivational orientations on performance and emotion in a real-time, multi-task setting. A laboratory simulation is reported that examines the influence of an induced approach-centered, an avoidance-centered, and a “neutral” motivational mindset upon multiple aspects of task performance, self-regulatory cognition, and affect. Undergraduate females randomly assigned to one of three mindset conditions performed a simulated automobile drive across one practice and two experimental trials. Dependent measures included divided attention, behavioral indicators of driving “cautiousness” in relatively safe straight roadway sections as well as during more risk-filled driving, multiple aspects of self-regulatory thinking (including self-monitoring, intended effort, and self-administered consequences), and positive and negative affect. Results revealed that the avoidant mindset produced poorer executive attention (i.e., fewer correctly detected divided attention events), more “cautious” driving behavior and reduced performance variability (i.e., greater control) when driving on presumably safe, straight roadway sections, lower self-reports of intended effort, and greater negative affect relative to the approach mindset. Results are intepreted within a self-regulation-centered motivational framework. Implications of the multi-task simulation for the study of normal and disordered adjustment are considered.