Search

Background: Failures of communication are a major contributor to perioperative adverse events. Transitions of care may be particularly vulnerable. We sought to improve postoperative handovers., Methods: We introduced a multimodal intervention in an adult and a pediatric postanesthesia care unit (PACU) to improve postoperative handovers between anesthesia providers (APs) and PACU registered nurses (RNs). The intervention included a standardized electronic handover report form, a didactic webinar, mandatory simulation training focused on improving interprofessional communication, and post-training performance feedback. Trained, blinded nurse observers scored PACU handovers during 17 months using a structured tool consisting of 8 subscales and a global score (1-5 scale). Multivariate logistic regression assessed the effect of the intervention on the proportion of observed handovers receiving a global effectiveness rating of ≥3., Results: Four hundred fifty-two clinicians received the simulation-based training, and 981 handovers were observed and rated. In the adult PACU, the estimated percentages of acceptable handovers (global ratings ≥3) among AP-RN pairs, where neither received simulation-based training (untrained dyads), was 3% (95% confidence interval, 1%-11%) at day 0, 10% (5%-19%) at training initiation (day 40), and 57% (33%-78%) at 1-year post-training initiation (day 405). For AP-RN pairs where at least one received the simulation-based training (trained dyads), these percentages were estimated to be 18% (11%-28%) and 68% (57%-76%) on days 40 and 405, respectively. The percentage of acceptable handovers was significantly greater on day 405 than it was on day 40 for both untrained (P < 0.001) and trained dyads (P < 0.001). Similar patterns were observed in the pediatric PACU. Three years later, the unadjusted estimate of the probability of an acceptable handover was 87% (72%-95%) in the adult PACU and 56% (40%-72%) in the pediatric PACU., Conclusions: A multimodal intervention substantially improved interprofessional PACU handovers, including those by clinicians who had not undergone formal simulation training. An effect appeared to be present >3 years later.

Background: Measurement of postoperative pain scores on arrival to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) is a potential quality metric for supervising anesthesiologists. Our goal in this study was to determine whether rank-ordering by initial PACU numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, as collected by nurses in a nonresearch clinical setting, could be used to compare anesthesiologists after adjusting for confounding factors., Methods: For a large population of adult patients, the admission PACU NRS pain scores (0-10) were evaluated using proportional odds mixed effects models. Fixed effects included age, gender, race, opioids in the preoperative medication list, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, emergency surgery, laparoscopic approach, outpatient status, anesthesiologist, and PACU nurse; surgeon and surgical procedure were included as random effects., Results: A total of 26,680 initial PACU pain scores were analyzed. The PACU nurse had the largest observed association with initial PACU pain score. Compared with the nurse with the median covariate adjusted NRS score, the odds ratio (OR) for an increased reported pain score ranged from 0.16 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.11 to 0.24) to 2.95 (95% CI 2.43 to 3.59). For anesthesiologists, the ORs for an increase in reported pain ranged from 0.60 (95% CI 0.37 to 0.99) to 1.44 (95% CI 0.98 to 2.11). Factors associated with increased pain scores were preoperative opioids, female gender, and ASA physical status 2 and 3. Lower pain scores were associated with outpatient surgery, laparoscopy, African American race, and older patients., Conclusions: There is little to no evidence to suggest that supervising anesthesiologists can be compared with one another effectively using admission PACU NRS pain scores. The confounding association of the PACU nurse eliciting the admission pain score greatly exceeded the contribution by the anesthesiologist.

Background: Anesthesiology groups continually seek data sources and evaluation metrics for ongoing professional practice evaluation, credentialing, and other quality initiatives. The analysis of patient complaints associated with physicians has been previously shown to be a marker for patient dissatisfaction and a predictor of malpractice claims. Additionally, previous studies in other specialties have revealed a nonuniform distribution of complaints among professionals. In this study, we describe the distribution of complaints among anesthesia providers and identify factors associated with complaint risk in pediatric and adult populations., Methods: We performed an analysis of a complaint database for an academic medical center. Complaints were recorded as comments during postoperative telephone calls to ambulatory surgery patients regarding the quality of their anesthesiology care. Calls between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2010 were included. Risk factors were grouped into 3 categories: patient demographics, procedural, and provider characteristics., Results: A total of 22,871 calls placed on behalf of 120 anesthesiologists were evaluated, of which 307 yielded a complaint. There was no evidence of provider-to-provider heterogeneity in complaint risk in the pediatric population. In the adult population, an unadjusted test for the random intercept variance component in the mixed effects model pointed toward significant heterogeneity (P = 0.01); however, after adjusting for a prespecified set of risk factors, provider-to-provider heterogeneity was no longer observed (P = 0.20). Several risk factors exhibited evidence for complaint risk. In the pediatric patient model, risk factors associated with complaint risk included a 10-year change in age, the use of general anesthesia (versus not), and a 1-hour change in the actual minus scheduled start times. Odds ratios were 1.47 (95% confidence interval (CI), 1.04-2.08), 0.22 (95% CI, 0.07-0.62), and 1.27 (95% CI, 1.10-1.47), respectively. In the adult patient model, risk factors associated with complaint risk included male gender, general anesthesia, a 10-year change in provider experience, and speaking with the patient (rather than a family member). Odd ratios were 0.66 (95% CI, 0.47-0.92), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.47-0.95), 1.18 (95% CI, 1.01-1.38), and 1.96 (95% CI, 1.17-3.29), respectively., Conclusions: There was apparent evidence in adult patients to suggest heterogeneity in provider risk for a patient complaint. However, once patient, procedural, and provider factors were acknowledged in analyses, such evidence for heterogeneity is diminished substantially. Further study into how and why these factors are associated with greater complaint risk may reveal potential interventions to decrease complaints.

Background: Risk factors for the development of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) include positive fluid balance, high tidal volumes (TVs), high airway pressures, and transfusion of blood products. However, research examining intraoperative factors such as fluid resuscitation, mechanical ventilation strategies, and blood administration on the postoperative development of ARDS is lacking., Methods: We assessed patients admitted to the ICU with postoperative hypoxemic respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation for the development of ARDS in the first 7 postoperative days using established clinical and radiological criteria. Data on risk factors for ARDS were obtained from the electronic anesthetic and medical records. Logistic regression was used to examine the independent association between fluid resuscitation, TV per ideal body weight, and number of blood products transfused during surgery and the postoperative development of ARDS, adjusting for important clinical covariates., Results: Of the 89 patients with postoperative respiratory failure, 25 developed ARDS. Compared with those who received <10 mL/kg/h fluid resuscitation in the operating room, patients receiving >20 mL/kg/h fluid resuscitation had a 3.8 times higher adjusted odds of developing ARDS (P = 0.04), and those receiving 10 to 20 mL/kg/h had a 2.4 times higher adjusted odds of developing ARDS (P = 0.14). TV per ideal body weight and the number of blood units transfused were not associated with ARDS development in this study., Conclusions: This cohort study provides evidence to suggest a relationship between intraoperative fluid resuscitation and the development of ARDS. Larger prospective trials are required to confirm these findings.

Background: In this study, we performed the infraclavicular block with combined ultrasound guidance and neurostimulation to selectively target cords to compare the success rates of placing a single injection of local anesthetic either in a central or peripheral location., Methods: Two hundred eighteen patients were enrolled in a consecutive, prospective study. Patients were randomized to injection of local anesthetic either centrally (posterior cord) or peripherally (medial or lateral cord) using ultrasound guidance and neurostimulation. Supervised senior anesthesiology residents or attending anesthesiologists performed the blocks. Both intent-to-treat and treatment-received analyses were used to compare central and peripheral placement efficacy., Results: The overall success rate was significantly higher for the central placements than peripheral placements (96% vs 85%, P = 0.004). Individual cord success rates were as follows: posterior 99%, lateral 92%, and medial 84% (P = 0.001). The central group required attending physician intervention more frequently (27% vs 6%, P < 0.001). Postoperative pain scores of < or =3 were more likely with central placement (100% vs 94%, P = 0.012)., Conclusion: Central placement of a single injection of local anesthetic targeted at the posterior cord resulted in a higher success rate for infraclavicular block.