Search

Extended abstract of a paper presented at Microscopy and Microanalysis 2009 in Richmond, Virginia, USA, July 26 – July 30, 2009 [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) prophylaxis is consistently considered a key indicator of anesthesia care quality. PONV may disproportionately impact disadvantaged patients. The primary objectives of this study were to examine the associations between sociodemographic factors and the incidence of PONV and clinician adherence to a PONV prophylaxis protocol., Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all patients eligible for an institution-specific PONV prophylaxis protocol (2015-2017). Sociodemographic and PONV risk data were collected. Primary outcomes were PONV incidence and clinician adherence to PONV prophylaxis protocol. We used descriptive statistics to compare sociodemographics, procedural characteristics, and protocol adherence for patients with and without PONV. Multivariable logistic regression analysis followed by Tukey-Kramer correction for multiple comparisons was used to test for associations between patient sociodemographics, procedural characteristics, PONV risk, and (1) PONV incidence and (2) adherence to PONV prophylaxis protocol., Results: Within the 8384 patient sample, Black patients had a 17% lower risk of PONV than White patients (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73-0.95; P = .006). When there was adherence to the PONV prophylaxis protocol, Black patients were less likely to experience PONV compared to White patients (aOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70-0.93; P = .003). When there was adherence to the protocol, patients with Medicaid were less likely to experience PONV compared to privately insured patients (aOR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.64-1.04; P = .017). When the protocol was followed for high-risk patients, Hispanic patients were more likely to experience PONV than White patients (aOR, 2.96; 95% CI, 1.18-7.42; adjusted P = .022). Compared to White patients, protocol adherence was lower for Black patients with moderate (aOR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.64-0.91; P = .003) and high risk (aOR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.42-0.78; P = .0004)., Conclusions: Racial and sociodemographic disparities exist in the incidence of PONV and clinician adherence to a PONV prophylaxis protocol. Awareness of such disparities in PONV prophylaxis could improve the quality of perioperative care., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: The REGAIN (Regional versus General Anesthesia for Promoting Independence after Hip Fracture) trial found similar ambulation and survival at 60 days with spinal versus general anesthesia for hip fracture surgery. Trial outcomes evaluating pain, prescription analgesic use, and patient satisfaction have not yet been reported., Objective: To compare pain, analgesic use, and satisfaction after hip fracture surgery with spinal versus general anesthesia., Design: Preplanned secondary analysis of a pragmatic randomized trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02507505)., Setting: 46 U.S. and Canadian hospitals., Participants: Patients aged 50 years or older undergoing hip fracture surgery., Intervention: Spinal or general anesthesia., Measurements: Pain on postoperative days 1 through 3; 60-, 180-, and 365-day pain and prescription analgesic use; and satisfaction with care., Results: A total of 1600 patients were enrolled. The average age was 78 years, and 77% were women. A total of 73.5% (1050 of 1428) of patients reported severe pain during the first 24 hours after surgery. Worst pain over the first 24 hours after surgery was greater with spinal anesthesia (rated from 0 [no pain] to 10 [worst pain imaginable]; mean difference, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.12 to 0.68]). Pain did not differ across groups at other time points. Prescription analgesic use at 60 days occurred in 25% (141 of 563) and 18.8% (108 of 574) of patients assigned to spinal and general anesthesia, respectively (relative risk, 1.33 [CI, 1.06 to 1.65]). Satisfaction was similar across groups., Limitation: Missing outcome data and multiple outcomes assessed., Conclusion: Severe pain is common after hip fracture. Spinal anesthesia was associated with more pain in the first 24 hours after surgery and more prescription analgesic use at 60 days compared with general anesthesia., Primary Funding Source: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute .

Background: Postoperative pulmonary complications can have a significant impact on the morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing major surgeries. Intraoperative lung protective strategies using low tidal volume (TV) ventilation and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) have been demonstrated to reduce the incidence of pulmonary injury and infection while improving oxygenation and respiratory mechanics. The purpose of this study was to develop decision support systems designed to optimize behavior of the attending anesthesiologist with regards to adherence with established intraoperative lung-protective ventilation (LPV) strategies., Methods: Over a 4-year period, data were obtained from 49,386 procedures and 109 attendings. Cases were restricted to patients aged 18 years or older requiring general anesthesia that lasted at least 60 minutes. We defined protective lung ventilation as a TV of 6-8 mL/kg ideal body weight and a PEEP of ≥4 cm H2O. There was a baseline period followed by 4 behavioral interventions: education, near real-time feedback, individualized post hoc feedback, and enhanced multidimensional decision support. Segmented logistic regression using generalized estimating equations was performed in order to assess temporal trends and effects of interventions on adherence to LPV strategies., Results: Consistent with improvement in adherence with LPV strategies during the baseline period, the predicted probability of adherence with LPV at the end of baseline was 0.452 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.422-0.483). The improvements observed for each phase were relative to the preceding phase. Education alone was associated with an 8.7% improvement (P < .01) in adherence to lung-protective protocols and was associated with a 16% increase in odds of adherence (odds ratio [OR] = 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01-1.33; P = .04). Near real-time, on-screen feedback was associated with an estimated 15.5% improvement in adherence (P < .01) with a 69% increase in odds of adherence (OR = 1.69; 95% CI, 1.46-1.96; P < .01) over education alone. The addition of an individualized dashboard with personal adherence and peer comparison was associated with a significant improvement over near real-time feedback (P < .01). Near real-time feedback and dashboard feedback systems were enhanced based on feedback from the in-room attendings, and this combination was associated with an 18.1% (P < .01) increase in adherence with a 2-fold increase in the odds of adherence (OR = 2.23; 95% CI, 1.85-2.69; P < .0001) between the end of the previous on-screen feedback phase and the start of the individualized post hoc dashboard reporting phase. The adherence with lung-protective strategies using the multidimensional approach has been sustained for over 24 months. The difference between the end of the previous phase and the start of this last enhanced multidimensional decision support phase was not significant (OR = 1.08; 95% CI, 0.86-1.34; P = .48)., Conclusions: Consistent with the literature, near real-time and post hoc reporting are associated with positive and sustained behavioral changes aimed at adopting evidence-based clinical strategies. Many decision support systems have demonstrated impact to behavior, but the effect is often transient. The implementation of near real-time feedback and individualized post hoc decision support tools has resulted in clinically relevant improvements in adherence with LPV strategies that have been sustained for over 24 months, a common limitation of decision support solutions., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the International Anesthesia Research Society.)

The optimal timing of the preanesthesia evaluation varies with the patient's comorbidities. As anesthesiologists assume a broader role in perioperative care, there may be opportunities to provide additional patient management beyond historical routine anesthesia services. This study was thus undertaken to survey our institutional perioperative clinicians regarding their perceptions of patient medical conditions that (a) need additional time for preoperative clearance by anesthesiology before actually scheduling the date of surgery and (b) warrant additional preoperative evaluation and management services by an anesthesiologist. These data were used to create a pilot version of a Preoperative Patient Clearance and Consultation Screening Questionnaire.