Search

During recent droughts in North Carolina, various audiences have articulated needs for information that explains current or anticipated impacts, droughts’ geographic extent and timing, and how the ...

During recent droughts in North Carolina, decision makers have articulated needs for drought information, including current or anticipated impacts, geographic extent and timing, and how and who mon...

Anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) are rapidly gaining widespread acceptance. Aggressively promoted as an improvement to manual-entry recordkeeping systems in the areas of accuracy, completeness, quality improvement, billing, and vigilance, these systems record all patient vital signs and parameters, providing a legible hard copy and permanent electronic record. With well-documented financial incentives, as well as government subsidies, AIMS are becoming adopted at an unprecedented rate. With the goals of the federal government to enhance the use of the electronic medical record, there is an emerging belief that AIMS may soon be mandated, with more limited choices than currently available. As assessed by, and often in spite of the published evidence, concerns of practitioners still reflect many of the same concerns expressed in the editorial comments of the past.

Background. Anesthesia machines are known reservoirs of bacterial species, potentially contributing to healthcare associated infections (HAIs). An inexpensive, disposable, nonpermeable, transparent anesthesia machine wrap (AMW) may reduce microbial contamination of the anesthesia machine. This study quantified the density and diversity of bacterial species found on anesthesia machines after terminal cleaning and between cases during actual anesthesia care to assess the impact of the AMW. We hypothesized reduced bioburden with the use of the AMW. Methods. In a prospective, experimental research design, the AMW was used in 11 surgical cases (intervention group) and not used in 11 control surgical cases. Cases were consecutively assigned to general surgical operating rooms. Seven frequently touched and difficult to disinfect “hot spots” were cultured on each machine preceding and following each case. The density and diversity of cultured colony forming units (CFUs) between the covered and uncovered machines were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Student’s t-tests. Results. There was a statistically significant reduction in CFU density and diversity when the AMW was employed. Conclusion. The protective effect of the AMW during regular anesthetic care provides a reliable and low-cost method to minimize the transmission of pathogens across patients and potentially reduces HAIs.

Anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) are rapidly gaining widespread acceptance. Aggressively promoted as an improvement to manual-entry recordkeeping systems (MERS) in the areas of accuracy, quality improvement, billing and vigilance, these systems record all patient vital signs and parameters, providing a legible hard copy and permanent electronic record. Concern exists that the practitioner may be less vigilant unless this data is recorded manually. This study’s purpose was to determine if vigilance, as measured by the ability to recall important data, is influenced by the method of recordkeeping. This study analyzed differences in the accuracy of Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists’ (CRNAs) recall of specific patient variables during the course of an actual anesthetic case. CRNAs using AIMS were compared to CRNAs using MERS. Accuracy of recalled values of 10 patient variables was measured: highest and lowest values for heart rate, systolic blood pressure, inspiratory pressure, and end-tidal carbon dioxide levels, lowest oxygen saturation and total fluid volume. Four tertiary care facilities participated in this research; two of which used MERS, two utilized AIMS. A total of 214 subjects participated in this study; 106 in the computerized recordkeeping group, and 108 in the manual entry recordkeeping group. Demographic covariates were analyzed to ensure homogeneity between groups and facilities. No significant statistical differences were identified between the accuracy of recall among the groups. There was no difference in the accuracy of practitioners’ recall of patient variables when using computerized or manual entry recordkeeping systems, suggesting little impact on vigilance.