Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması

Mertcan Ramazan Tek; Mustafa Oğuzhan Erol; Ayşe Banu Birlik; Meltem Yılmaz Coşar

TR EN

Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Sezaryen operasyonlarında postoperatif ağrı yönetimi, annenin erken mobilizasyonu ve yenidoğan bakımı açısından kritik önem taşımaktadır. Bu prospektif karşılaştırmalı çalışma, sezaryen operasyonlarında uygulanan rejyonel anestezi (RA) ve genel anestezi (GA) yöntemlerinin postoperatif ağrı şiddeti, iyileşme kalitesi ve yaşam kalitesi üzerindeki etkilerini değerlendirmeyi amaçlamıştır. Çalışmaya Mayıs 2025–Şubat 2026 tarihleri arasında 18–50 yaş arası toplam 75 hasta (RA: n=39, GA: n=36) dahil edilmiştir. Ağrı değerlendirmesinde Görsel Analog Skala (VAS), iyileşme kalitesi için QoR-40 ve yaşam kalitesi için KF-36 ölçekleri kullanılmıştır. Postoperatif ilk 24 saatteki VAS skorları gruplar arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı farklılık göstermemiştir (RA: 5,95±2,19 vs. GA: 6,33±2,55; p=0,485). QoR-40 toplam skorları (RA: 167,20±19,27 vs. GA: 165,79±17,34; p=0,740) ve KF-36'nın tüm alt boyutlarında da gruplar arasında anlamlı fark saptanmamıştır. Bununla birlikte, ilk mobilizasyon (p=0,004) ve ilk oral alım süreleri (p=0,002) RA grubunda istatistiksel olarak anlamlı biçimde daha kısa bulunmuştur. Bu bulgular, her iki anestezi yönteminin ağrı ve iyileşme kalitesi açısından benzer sonuçlar doğurduğuna işaret etmekle birlikte, rejyonel anestezinin fonksiyonel iyileşme üzerindeki avantajı ERAS protokolleri çerçevesinde klinik öneme sahip bir bulgu olarak değerlendirilmektedir.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

TÜBİTAK

Project Number

1919B012468143

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışma, araştırma ve yayın etiği ilkelerine uygun olarak yürütülmüştür. Araştırma, İstinye Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Etik Kurulu tarafından 27.05.2025 tarih ve 25-96 karar numarası ile onaylanmıştır. Tüm katılımcılardan çalışmaya katılım öncesinde yazılı bilgilendirilmiş onam alınmıştır. Çalışma, Helsinki Deklarasyonu ilkelerine uygun olarak gerçekleştirilmiştir.

Thanks

Bu çalışmanın yürütülmesine olanak sağlayan İstinye Üniversitesi Medikal Park Ataşehir Hastanesi yönetimine teşekkür ederiz. Araştırma sürecindeki değerli katkıları için Doç. Dr. Osman Esen ve anestezi ekibine, destek ve yönlendirmeleri için İstinye Üniversitesi Sağlık Hizmetleri Meslek Yüksekokulu Anestezi Program Başkanı Öğr. Gör. Atiye Türker’e teşekkür ederiz. Ayrıca, çalışmamıza sağladığı finansal destek için TÜBİTAK’a şükranlarımızı sunarız.

Comparison of the Effects of General and Regional Anesthesia on Postoperative Pain and Quality of Recovery in Cesarean Section Operations

Abstract

Postoperative pain management in cesarean delivery is critical for early maternal mobilization and neonatal care. This prospective comparative study aimed to evaluate the effects of regional anesthesia (RA) and general anesthesia (GA) on postoperative pain intensity, recovery quality, and health-related quality of life in cesarean section patients. A total of 75 patients aged 18–50 years (RA: n=39, GA: n=36) were enrolled between May 2025 and February 2026. Pain was assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), recovery quality with the QoR-40 questionnaire, and quality of life with the SF-36 scale. VAS scores within the first 24 postoperative hours did not differ significantly between groups (RA: 5.95±2.19 vs. GA: 6.33±2.55; p=0.485). Total QoR-40 scores (RA: 167.20±19.27 vs. GA: 165.79±17.34; p=0.740) and all SF-36 subscales were also comparable between groups. However, time to first mobilization (p=0.004) and first oral intake (p=0.002) were significantly shorter in the RA group. These findings suggest that both anesthetic techniques yield similar outcomes in terms of pain and recovery quality; nevertheless, the functional recovery advantage of regional anesthesia represents a clinically meaningful benefit within the framework of ERAS protocols.

Keywords

Supporting Institution

TUBİTAK

Project Number

1919B012468143

Ethical Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the principles of research and publication ethics. Ethical approval was obtained from the Health Sciences Ethics Committee of Istinye University (Decision No: 25-96, Date: 27.05.2025). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to inclusion in the study. The study was carried out in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

Thanks

The authors would like to thank the administration of Istinye University Medical Park Ataşehir Hospital for providing the necessary environment for conducting this study. We are grateful to Assoc. Prof. Osman Esen and the anesthesia team for their valuable contributions during the research process. We also thank Lecturer Atiye Türker, Head of the Anesthesia Program at Istinye University Vocational School of Health Services, for her support and guidance. We sincerely acknowledge TÜBİTAK for their financial support.

References

Akbaş, P., Özkan Şat, S., İş, M., Yaman, Ş. (2021). Doğum Ağrısı ile Baş Etme Skalası’nın Türkçe Geçerlik-Güvenirlik Çalışması. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 7(3), 235-241. https://doi.org/10.30934/kusbed.912257
Al Moosa, A. M., Burad, J., Jose, S., Al Jabri, R. M. (2023). A Five-Year Retrospective Closed Cohort Study to Find a Superior Anaesthetic Technique for Caesarean Section From a Haemodynamic Perspective. Cureus, 15(12), e51000. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.51000
Andrić, I., Vladić-Spaić, D., Karlović, Z., Milas, A., Matić, B., Šimić, S., Mihalj, M. (2022). Level Of Paın And Analgesıcs Taken After Cesarean Sectıon And Dıfferences Accordıng To Type Of Anesthesıa And Demographıc Factors. Acta clinica Croatica, 61(4), 581–587. https://doi.org/10.20471/acc.2022.61.04.03
Bollag, L., Lim, G., Sultan, P., Habib, A. S., Landau, R., Zakowski, M., Tiouririne, M., Bhambhani, S., Carvalho, B. (2021). Society for Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology: Consensus Statement and Recommendations for Enhanced Recovery After Cesarean. Anesthesia and analgesia, 132(5), 1362–1377. https://doi.org/10.1213/ANE.0000000000005257
Du W, Qian X, Xu Z, Liu Z. The role of anesthesiologists in postpartum depression: current perspectives and future directions. Front Psychiatry. 2025 Mar 19; 16:1511817. Doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2025.1511817. PMID:40177590; PMCID: PMC11963768.
Duch P, Ekelund K, Nedergaard HK. What matters to mothers: A qualitative exploration of pain and recovery after cesarean section. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2025 Mar;69(3):e14579. doi: 10.1111/aas.14579. PMID: 39853562; PMCID: PMC11757011.
Hung, K. H., Tsao, S. L., Yang, S. F., Wang, B. Y., Huang, J. Y., Li, W. T., Yeh, L. T., Lin, C. H., Chen, Y. Y., Yeh, C. B. (2022). Association of General Anesthesia and Neuraxial Anesthesia in Caesarean Section with Maternal Postpartum Depression: A Retrospective Nationwide Population-Based Cohort Study. Journal of personalized medicine, 12(6),970.https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm12060970
Karaman, S., Arici, S., Dogru, S., Karaman, T., Tapar, H., Kaya, Z., Suren, M., Gurler Balta, M. (2014). Validation of the Turkish version of the Quality of Recovery-40 questionnaire. Health and quality of life outcomes, 12, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7525-12-8

Koçyiğit, H., Aydemir, Ö., Ölmez, N. ve Memiş, A. (1999). Kısa form-36 (KF36)’nın Türkçe versiyonunun güvenirliliği ve geçerliliği. İlaç ve Tedavi Dergisi,12(2), 102-106.
Kovac A. L. (2013). Update on the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Drugs, 73(14), 1525–1547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40265-013-0110-7
Kutlu, R., Demirbaş, N., Çivi, S., Can, A. (2015). Göğüs cerrahisi servisinde yatan hastalarda depresyonun ve yaşam kalitesinin kısa form 36 ile değerlendirilmesi. Türk Göğüs Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi, 23(3),524-531.
Langer, S., Lim, G., Qiu, Y., Biaesch, J., Neuman, M. D. (2025). Neonatal Outcomes with Regional versus General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Anesthesiology, 144(2), 325336.https://doi.org/10.1097/ALN.0000000000005785
Liu, T., Wang, Y., Xiao, X., Chen, Z., Li, X., Liu, C. (2025). Comparison of maternal and neonatal outcomes between general anesthesia and combined spinal-epidural anesthesia in cesarean delivery for pregnancy complicated with placenta previa. BMC anesthesiology, 25(1), 294. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12871-025-03149-0
Myles, P. S., Weitkamp, B., Jones, K., Melick, J., Hensen, S. (2000). Validity and reliability of a postoperative quality of recovery score: the QoR-40. British journal of anaesthesia, 84(1), 11–15. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.bja.a013366
Ohnesorge, H., Günther, V., Grünewald, M., Maass, N., Alkatout, İ. (2020). Postoperative pain management in obstetrics and gynecology. Journal of the Turkish German Gynecological Association, 21(4), 287–297. https://doi.org/10.4274/jtgga.galenos.2020.2020.0024
Stanisic, D. M., Kalezic, N., Rakic, A., Rajovic, N., Mostic, T. I., Cumic, J., Stulic, J., Rudic Biljic Erski, I., Divac, N., Milic, N., Stojanovic, R. (2022). Comparison of Post-Cesarean Pain Perception of General Versus Regional Anesthesia, a Single-Center Study. Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 59(1), 44. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59010044
Ware, J. E., Jr, Sherbourne, C. D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Medical care, 30(6), 473–483.
Zhang, K., Jiao, B., Sun, J., Zhang, X., Zhang, G., Li, N., Liu, B., Zhou, Z. (2025). Predicting high-risk factors for postoperative inadequate analgesia and adverse reactions in cesarean delivery surgery: a prospective study. International journal of surgery (London, England), 111(6), 3859–3875. https://doi.org/10.1097/JS9.0000000000002354
Zhao, Z. M., Yang, J. Q., Wang, G. X., Yu, X. J., Feng, Y. (2025). A meta-analysis of the effects of multimodal intervention measures on the recovery of postpartum women after cesarean section. Frontiers in medicine, 12, 1690139. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2025.1690139

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

Anaesthesiology

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Mertcan Ramazan Tek
0000-0000-0000-0001
Türkiye

Mustafa Oğuzhan Erol
0000-0000-0000-0000
Türkiye

Ayşe Banu Birlik
0000-0001-5148-3784
Türkiye

Meltem Yılmaz Coşar ^*
0000-0003-1658-5122
Türkiye

Publication Date

October 19, 2026

Submission Date

April 10, 2026

Acceptance Date

September 1, 2026

Published in Issue

Year 2026 Volume: 4

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA96JU66CY

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Tek, M. R., Erol, M. O., Birlik, A. B., & Yılmaz Coşar, M. (2026). Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması. Health Services Research Journal, 4, 82-90. https://izlik.org/JA96JU66CY

AMA

1.Tek MR, Erol MO, Birlik AB, Yılmaz Coşar M. Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması. HES Journal. 2026;4:82-90. https://izlik.org/JA96JU66CY

Chicago

Tek, Mertcan Ramazan, Mustafa Oğuzhan Erol, Ayşe Banu Birlik, and Meltem Yılmaz Coşar. 2026. “Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel Ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı Ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması”. Health Services Research Journal 4 (October): 82-90. https://izlik.org/JA96JU66CY.

EndNote

Tek MR, Erol MO, Birlik AB, Yılmaz Coşar M (October 1, 2026) Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması. Health Services Research Journal 4 82–90.

IEEE

[1]M. R. Tek, M. O. Erol, A. B. Birlik, and M. Yılmaz Coşar, “Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması”, HES Journal, vol. 4, pp. 82–90, Oct. 2026, [Online]. Available: https://izlik.org/JA96JU66CY

ISNAD

Tek, Mertcan Ramazan - Erol, Mustafa Oğuzhan - Birlik, Ayşe Banu - Yılmaz Coşar, Meltem. “Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel Ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı Ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması”. Health Services Research Journal 4 (October 1, 2026): 82-90. https://izlik.org/JA96JU66CY.

JAMA

1.Tek MR, Erol MO, Birlik AB, Yılmaz Coşar M. Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması. HES Journal. 2026;4:82–90.

MLA

Tek, Mertcan Ramazan, et al. “Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel Ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı Ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması”. Health Services Research Journal, vol. 4, Oct. 2026, pp. 82-90, https://izlik.org/JA96JU66CY.

Vancouver

1.Mertcan Ramazan Tek, Mustafa Oğuzhan Erol, Ayşe Banu Birlik, Meltem Yılmaz Coşar. Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması. HES Journal [Internet]. 2026 Oct. 1;4:82-90. Available from: https://izlik.org/JA96JU66CY

Manuscripts must be written in either Turkish or English. In order to ensure the smooth progress of the manuscript evaluation process, the following documents must be uploaded to the system completely and in accordance with the provided templates. The uploaded files will be reviewed, and in case of non-compliance with the template or missing documents, the author will be asked to make the necessary revisions.

Under the “Forms and Templates” page, the following documents can also be accessed:

The abstract should be written without a heading, must not exceed 250 words, and should include at least 3 and at most 5 keywords. Keywords must be separated by commas, and the first letter of each keyword must be capitalized.
A single space should be left after punctuation marks in the text.
In Turkish texts, commas should be used as decimal separators.
Lines should not begin with numbers, abbreviations, or symbols.
Frequently used terms consisting of multiple words should be abbreviated using their initials. Abbreviations should be defined at their first occurrence, followed by the abbreviation in parentheses. Standard abbreviations such as TÜBİTAK or cm may be used without definition. Example: World Health Organization (WHO).
Similarity rates must not exceed 20% in total according to plagiarism detection software, and no single reference should exceed 1%.
APA (7th Edition) citation style must be used for both in-text citations and references. Accordingly, sources should be cited in parentheses with the author’s surname and year. Example: (Kaya, 2021; Aytaç and Yakın, 2024; Bulut et al., 2025).
References in the text must be consistent with the reference list. Reference management software (EndNote, Mendeley, etc.) may be used. DOI numbers must be included. If the manuscript is written in Turkish, “ve” should be used; if in English, “and” should be used.

Citation Format

Single Author
In-text (parenthetical):
→ (Kaya, 2021)

In-text (narrative):
→ Kaya (2021) stated that...

Reference list:
Kaya, M. (2019). Burnout levels and affecting factors among healthcare workers. Health and Society Journal, 29(3), 145–152. https://doi.org/10.5455/stdergi.2019.14552

Two Authors
In-text (parenthetical):
→ (Yıldız and Demirtaş, 2020)

In-text (narrative):
→ Yıldız and Demirtaş (2020) stated that...

Reference list:
Yıldız, Z., Demirtaş, E. (2020). Problems encountered in the use of hospital information systems. Health Informatics Research Journal, 5(2), 75–83. https://doi.org/10.31023/sbad.2020.75

Three or More Authors
In-text (parenthetical):
→ (Evcili et al., 2012)

(Note: “vd.” is used in Turkish literature — “et al.” is used in English.)

In-text (narrative):
→ Evcili et al. (2012) stated that...

Reference list:
Evcili, H., Kara, F., Tunç, M. (2012). The use of electronic health records by nurses. Clinical and Experimental Research Journal, 4(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.17826/kdad.2012.22

Edited Books
Özbek, M. (Ed.) (2005). Public Sphere. Istanbul: Hil

Book Chapter in Edited Book
Kejanlıoğlu, B. (2005). The concept of public sphere in media studies. In Meral Özbek (Ed.), Public Sphere (pp. 689–713). Istanbul: Hil.

Books with Multiple Editions
Strunk, W. Jr., White, E. B. (2000). The Elements of Style (4th ed.). New York: Longman.

Electronic books and journals
Chan, H. F., Guillot, M., Page, L., Torgler, B. (2015). The inner quality of an article: Will time tell? Scientometrics, 104:19–41. DOI:10.1007/s11192-015-1581y

Turner, S. J. (2010). Website statistics 2.0: Using Google Analytics to measure library website effectiveness. Technical Services Quarterly, 27:261–278. DOI: 10.1080/07317131003765910

Al, U., Soydal, İ. (2014). Library Turkey Project: Public library usage research. Turkish Librarianship, 28:288–307. Access link: http://www.tk.org.tr/index.php/TK

Web page
Hacettepe University. (n.d.). Mission, vision and values. Access link: http://hacettepe.edu.tr/hakkinda/misyonvizyondegerler (Access date: January 4, 2023)

Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

The publication processes implemented by the Health Services Research Journal (HES Journal) serve as the foundation for the impartial and respected development and dissemination of knowledge. In this regard, the processes applied directly reflect the quality of the works of authors and the institutions supporting them. Peer-reviewed studies are those that concretely embody and support the scientific method. At this point, it is essential that all stakeholders of the process (authors, readers and researchers, publisher, reviewers, and editors) comply with ethical standards. Within the scope of publication ethics, our journal expects all stakeholders to adhere to the following ethical responsibilities.

The ethical duties and responsibilities outlined below have been prepared in accordance with the guidelines and policies published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) under open access principles.

A- Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of Authors

Submitted manuscripts are expected to be original. If authors use or benefit from other works, they must provide complete and accurate citations and/or quotations. Paraphrasing methods, etc., are considered ethical violations by our journal.
Individuals who do not intellectually contribute to the content of the study should not be listed as authors.
In copyrighted works, the author who contributes the most should be listed as the first author; academic title superiority alone does not justify first authorship.
Any potential conflicts of interest must be disclosed in submitted manuscripts.
Authors may be requested to provide raw data during the evaluation process and must be prepared to submit such data to the editorial and scientific boards when required.
Authors must possess documentation proving they have the rights to use the data, necessary permissions for research/analysis, or informed consent from participants. Even if not requested by the journal, such documentation must be available.
If authors identify an error or mistake in a published, early-view, or under-review manuscript, they are obliged to inform the editor and cooperate in correction or retraction processes.
Authors may not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously. Each submission must follow the completion of the previous process. Previously published works cannot be submitted to our journal.
Changes in authorship (addition, removal, or order change) are not permitted after the evaluation process has begun. However, in the DergiPark system, such requests may be considered by HES Journal if submitted by the corresponding or first author with signed consent forms from all co-authors.

B- Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of Editors

HES Journal editors and section editors are required to adhere to the following ethical duties and responsibilities based on the open-access guidelines published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), namely the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors and COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors:

Editors are responsible for all publications in the journal. In this context, they undertake the following roles and obligations:
Strive to meet the information needs of readers and authors.
Continuously work toward the development and improvement of the journal.
Take an active role in improving the quality of published works.
Support freedom of thought and encourage the inclusion of original and foreign-language works.
Ensure processes comply with intellectual property rights and ethical standards.
Ensure transparency in cases requiring correction or clarification.
Support field editors through guidance and communication via digital and verbal means.
Consider feedback from readers, researchers, and practitioners and provide informative responses.
Manuscripts within scope should be included in preliminary evaluation unless there is a serious issue.
Positive reviewer recommendations should not be ignored unless justified by serious concerns.
Decisions made by previous editors should not be changed without serious justification.
Assist section editors in maintaining the blind review process and prevent breaches of anonymity.
Ensure efficient management of peer-review and editorial workflows.
Encourage the development of the reviewer pool.
Protect intellectual property rights of all published works and defend the rights of authors and the journal against violations.
Take constructive criticism of published works into account.
Ensure authors are given the right to respond to criticism.
Handle complaints from authors, reviewers, and readers carefully and respond clearly and informatively.
Editorial independence must not be influenced by the publisher or any political or commercial entity.
Ensure rapid correction of errors, inconsistencies, or misleading statements in published works.

C- Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of Section Editors

Assign reviewers appropriate to the manuscript’s subject area.
Provide necessary guidance and information for reviewers.
Monitor potential conflicts of interest between authors and reviewers.
Ensure confidentiality in the blind review process.
Encourage objective, scientific, and impartial evaluations.
Evaluate reviewer performance based on timeliness and quality.
Implement policies to improve reviewer performance.
Maintain and regularly update the reviewer database.
If both reviewers reject a manuscript, the section editor may, if deemed scientifically valuable, send it to a third or fourth reviewer.
Maintain communication with authors throughout the process.
Rejection decisions should be communicated respectfully and with clear justification.

D- Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of Reviewers

Review at HES Journal is conducted under a double-blind peer review system. Reviewers must not communicate directly with authors.
Accept reviews only within their area of expertise.
Maintain confidentiality and impartiality.
Decline review if a conflict of interest exists.
Destroy manuscripts after review; only published final versions may be used.
Base evaluations solely on academic content, without discrimination.
Provide constructive and respectful feedback.
Complete reviews in a timely manner.
Protect intellectual property rights and journal copyrights.
Take precautions against academic misconduct, citation manipulation, and plagiarism.

E- Ethical Duties and Responsibilities of the Editorial Board

The Editorial Board of HES Journal is responsible for ensuring that all published articles comply with journal policies and international standards.

The editorial board consists of the Editor-in-Chief, Section Editors, Language Editors, Layout Editors, and Technical Editors.
Address deficiencies in content, technical, and visual aspects of the journal.
Actively participate in editorial meetings.
Hold regular meetings to improve journal policies and development.
Editorial independence must be maintained without interference from publishers.
Editors are responsible for all processes of submitted manuscripts.

F- Protection of Personal Data

HES Journal ensures the protection of personal data of research participants unless written consent is provided.
Protects personal data of editors, reviewers, authors, and readers.
Ensures protection of human and animal rights; manuscripts without ethics committee approval may be rejected.

G- Measures Against Misconduct

HES Journal takes necessary measures against misconduct and abuse of duty. Allegations are carefully investigated, and findings are evaluated objectively and reported by the editorial board.

H- Research and Publication Ethics

Research ethics ensures that studies are designed and conducted in accordance with ethical principles such as autonomy, non-maleficence, beneficence, and justice. The journal ensures that ethical issues, including conflicts of interest, are evaluated within international legal and ethical frameworks and ultimately decided by the ICAM Network Ethics Committee.

I- Handling Ethical Violations

Any unethical behavior or content beyond the responsibilities stated above should be reported to the HES Journal email address. Reports are evaluated by the editorial board and concluded with a final decision.

Baş Editör

Funda EVCILI

Health Sciences

Editor

Gülay DEMIR

Decision Support and Group Support Systems, Data Analysis, Biostatistics, Large and Complex Data Theory, Statistical Analysis, Spatial Statistics, Quantitative Decision Methods , Theory of Sampling, Multiple Criteria Decision Making

Alan Editörleri

ŞE

Şükran ERTEKIN PINAR

Mental Health Nursing

Gülay DEMIR

Decision Support and Group Support Systems, Data Analysis, Biostatistics, Large and Complex Data Theory, Statistical Analysis, Spatial Statistics, Quantitative Decision Methods , Theory of Sampling, Multiple Criteria Decision Making

HG

Handan GÜLER

Health Sciences, Midwifery, Nursing, Obstetrics and Gynocology Nursing

Gülşen GÜÇLÜ

Biological Sciences, Plant Biochemistry, Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Genetics

Ferdağ YILDIRIM

Pediatric Health and Illnesses Nursing

Mine BEKAR

Obstetrics and Gynocology Nursing

Fatma HASTAOĞLU

Geriatrics and Gerontology, Health Sciences, Nursing, Internal Diseases Nursing, Aged Health Care

Berna BAYSAL BAKAY

Medical Parasitology

Sebahattin KARABULUT

Medical Physiology (Other)

Songül ULUSOY

Analytical Chemistry, Analytical Spectrometry, Bioassays, Instrumental Methods, Separation Science

SH

Sevda HASTAOĞLU ÖRGEN

Terrestrial Ecology, Evolutionary Ecology, Animal Systematics and Taxonomy, Entomology

Erdoğan ÖZDEMIR

Physics Education

PÇ

Pelin ÇELIK

Nursing, Internal Diseases Nursing

Ayşegül ÖZTÜRK

Physiopathology, Cell Physiology

AÇ

Arzuhan ÇETINDAĞ

Physiopathology, Health Sciences, Nursing

Fatma TOK YILDIZ

Nursing, Fundamentals of Nursing

Kübra ASLAN

Health Policy, Health Literacy, Physiotherapy, Rehabilitation, Digital Health, People With Disability, Patient Safety, Health Management, Aged Health Care, Health Services and Systems (Other)

BÇ

Betül Esra ÇEVIK

Health Sciences Education and Development of Programs: Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Public Health Nursing

Yazım ve Dil Editörleri

TH

Tuğba HERGÜNER

Prosthodontics, Dental Public Health

Ezgi YILDIZ

Fundamentals of Nursing

BÇ

Betül Esra ÇEVIK

Health Sciences Education and Development of Programs: Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences, Public Health Nursing

Mizanpaj Editörleri

BS

Buse SEMERCI ARIKAN

Medical Biochemistry - Amino Acids and Metabolites, Medical Biochemistry - Carbohydrates, Medical Biochemistry - Proteins, Peptides and Proteomics

Kübra ASLAN

Health Policy, Health Literacy, Physiotherapy, Rehabilitation, Digital Health, People With Disability, Patient Safety, Health Management, Aged Health Care, Health Services and Systems (Other)

Teknik Editörler

Burak ATIK

Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Rehabilitation

Mehmed KOÇ

Artificial Intelligence (Other), Nanotechnology

Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması

Sezaryen Operasyonlarında Genel ve Rejyonel Anestezinin Postoperatif Ağrı ve İyileşme Kalitesi Üzerine Etkilerinin Karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Keywords

Supporting Institution

Project Number

Ethical Statement

Thanks

Comparison of the Effects of General and Regional Anesthesia on Postoperative Pain and Quality of Recovery in Cesarean Section Operations

Abstract

Keywords

Supporting Institution

Project Number

Ethical Statement

Thanks

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

IZ

Cite

Aim & Scope

Author Guidelines

Citation Format

Ethical Principles and Publication Policy

Indexes

Other Indexes

Journal Boards

Baş Editör

Editor

Alan Editörleri

Yazım ve Dil Editörleri

Mizanpaj Editörleri

Teknik Editörler

	Türk Medline Ulusal Sağlık Bilimleri Süreli Yayınlar Veritabanı
	ResearchBib