Comparison between Early and Delayed Oral Feeding in the Postoperative Period for the Patients Underwent Spinal Anaesthesia

Abstract

The timing of postoperative oral feeding after spinal anesthesia remains a topic of debate. A prospective, comparative study was conducted in the Department of Anaesthesiology of Community Based Medical College, Bangladesh (CBMC,B) Hospital, Mymensingh, Bangladesh, between January and June of 2025, to compare the effects of early versus delayed oral feeding in patients who underwent spinal anaesthesia. A total of 80 patients were purposively selected and randomly divided into two equal groups: group A (early feeding, i.e., within 6 hours) and group B (delayed feeding, i.e., after 12 hours). The mean age of the patients in group A and group B were 42.5±11.3 years and  44.2±10.8 years respectively. In group A, male and female were 55% and 45% respectively, while in group B male and female were 60% and 40% respectively. In group A, 70% and 30% patients belonged to the ASA-I and ASA-II category respectively, while in group B, 65% and 35% patients respectively. The mean duration of surgery was observed in group A and group B were 85.6±18.2 minutes and 82.4±20.1 minutes respectively. No differences were found in age, gender, ASA category and duration of surgery between two groups (p>0.05). Early return of bowel sounds (8.2±1.5 hours vs. 12.6±2.1 hours) and passage of flatus (14.3±3.2 hours vs. 19.8±4.5 hours) were reported in group A compared to group B (p<0.001). However, no differences were found in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (15% vs. 20%) and severe PONV (5% vs. 7.5%) between two groups (p>0.05). Shorter duration of hospital stay (2.3±0.7 days vs. 3.5±1.1 days) and higher patient satisfaction (8.6±1.2 vs. 6.9±1.5) were found in group A compared to group B (p<0.001). No difference was found in postoperative complications (e.g., wound infection 2.5% vs. 5.0%) between two groups (p>0.05). Our findings support the implementation of early feeding protocols in clinical practice in patients underwent spinal anaesthesia, particularly in resource-limited settings, where enhanced recovery can optimize outcomes.  

CBMJ 2026 July: Vol. 15 No. 02 P:114-119