Abstract Background: This study aimed to measure the levels of anxiety and burnout among healthcare workers, including attending physicians, residents, and nurses in intensive care units during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Methods: This is a cross-sectional survey analysis of healthcare workers in our institution. Data were collected on demographic variables, COVID-19 symptoms and test, disease status, anxiety level (assessed by the Beck Anxiety Inventory), and burnout level (measured by the Maslach Burnout Inventory). Subscales of the burnout inventory were evaluated separately. Results: A total of 104 participants completed the survey. Attending physicians, residents, and nurses constituted 25%, 33.7%, and 41.3% of the cohort, respectively. In comparison to untested participants, those tested for COVID-19 had a lower mean age (p = 0.02), higher emotional exhaustion and depersonalization scores (p = 0.001, 0.004, respectively), and lower personal accomplishment scores (p = 0.004). Furthermore, moderate to severe anxiety was observed more frequently in tested participants than untested ones (p = 0.022). Moderate or severe anxiety was seen in 23.1% of the attending physicians, 54.3% of the residents, and 48.8% of the nurses (p = 0.038). Emotional exhaustion, personal accomplishment, and depersonalization scores differed depending on the position of the healthcare workers (p = 0.034, 0.001, 0.004, respectively). Conclusion: This study revealed higher levels of anxiety and burnout in younger healthcare workers and those tested for COVID-19, which mainly included residents and nurses. The reasons for these observations should be further investigated to protect their mental health.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare selective spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia with regard to postoperative recovery and fast-track eligibility in day surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Sixty geriatric outpatient cases, with ASA II-III physical status and requiring shortduration transurethral intervention, were enrolled in the study. The cases were split into 2 groups: as general anesthesia (Group GA) and selective spinal anesthesia (Group SSA). Group GA (n = 30) received propofol 2 mg kg-1 (until loss of eyelash reflex), remifentanil induction 0.5-1 µg kg-1, and laryngeal mask. Maintenance was achieved by 4-6% desflurane in 60% N2O and 40% O2 along with remifentanil infusion at 0.05 µg /kg-1 /min-1. Drugs were discontinued after the withdrawal of the ureteroscope, and extubation was carried out with 100% O2. Group SSA (n = 30) received 0.5% spinal anesthesia via L4-5 space by 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 5 mg. Anesthesia preparation time, time to surgical anesthesia level, postoperative fast-tracking, and time to White-Song recovery score of 12, were noted. In the operating room, we evaluated hemodynamics, nausea/vomiting, surgeon and patient satisfaction with anesthesia, perioperative midazolam-fentanyl administration, postoperative pain, and discharge time. RESULTS: Anesthesia preparation time, length of surgery, anesthesia-related time in the operating room, time to sit, and time to walk were significantly low in Group GA (p < 0.05), whereas time to fast-track eligibility, length of stay in the PACU, discharge time, and other parameters were similar in both of the groups. CONCLUSION: While anesthesia preparation time, length of surgery, start time of surgery, time to sit, and time to walk were shorter in the General Anesthesia group, time to fast-track eligibility, phase 1 recovery time, and discharge time were similar among patients subjected to selective spinal anesthesia.