Search

Background: Severe headaches are common after subarachnoid hemorrhage. Guidelines recommend treatment with acetaminophen and opioids, but patient data show that headaches often persist despite multimodal treatment approaches. Considering an overall slim body of data for a common complaint affecting patients with SAH during their intensive care stay, we set out to assess practice patterns in headache management among clinicians who treat patients with SAH. Methods: We conducted an international cross-sectional study through a 37-question Web-based survey distributed to members of five professional societies relevant to intensive and neurocritical care from November 2021 to January 2022. Responses were characterized through descriptive analyses. Fisher's exact test was used to test associations. Results: Of 516 respondents, 329 of 497 (66%) were from North America and 121 of 497 (24%) from Europe. Of 435 respondents, 379 (87%) reported headache as a major management concern for patients with SAH. Intensive care teams were primarily responsible for analgesia during hospitalization (249 of 435, 57%), whereas responsibility shifted to neurosurgery at discharge (233 of 501, 47%). Most used medications were acetaminophen (90%), opioids (66%), corticosteroids (28%), and antiseizure medications (28%). Opioids or medication combinations including opioids were most frequently perceived as most effective by 169 of 433 respondents (39%, predominantly intensivists), followed by corticosteroids or combinations with corticosteroids (96 of 433, 22%, predominantly neurologists). Of medications prescribed at discharge, acetaminophen was most common (303 of 381, 80%), followed by opioids (175 of 381, 46%) and antiseizure medications (173 of 381, 45%). Opioids during hospitalization were significantly more prescribed by intensivists, by providers managing higher numbers of patients with SAH, and in Europe. At discharge, opioids were more frequently prescribed in North America. Of 435 respondents, 299 (69%) indicated no change in prescription practice of opioids with the opioid crisis. Additional differences in prescription patterns between continents and providers and while inpatient versus at discharge were found. Conclusions: Post-SAH headache in the intensive care setting is a major clinical concern. Analgesia heavily relies on opioids both in use and in perception of efficacy, with no reported change in prescription patterns for opioids for most providers despite the significant drawbacks of opioids. Responsibility for analgesia shifts between hospitalization and discharge. International and provider-related differences are evident. Novel treatment strategies and alignment of prescription between providers are urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a severe brain dysfunction. Although data indicate a high relevance, no survey has investigated the routine practice to monitor delirium outside the ICU setting after surgery. Prior to publishing of the new European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) guidelines on POD, an international survey was conducted to assess current practice.Methods: European Society of Anaesthesiology-endorsed online survey; Trial Registration: NCT-identifier: 02513537.Results: In total, 566 respondents from 62 countries accessed, and 564 (99.6%) completed the survey (completion rate). Overall, 385 (68%) of the respondents reported that delirium is either "very relevant" or "relevant" for their daily clinical practice. In all, 38 (7%) of the respondents routinely monitor for delirium in >50% of all patients. Asked on the monitoring time point, more than half (n = 308, 55%) indicated to screen before or at recovery room discharge, 235 (42%) up to the first postoperative day, 143 (25%) up to 3 days, and 77 (14%) up to 5 postoperative days. Although there is a lack of long-term monitoring, nearly all respondents (n = 530, 94%) reported to treat delirium. Availability of EEG/EMG-based monitoring to assess the depth of anaesthesia was high in the study group (n = 547, 97%) and was used by more than one-third of the respondents to reduce risk of burst suppression (n = 189, 34%).Conclusion: Although delirium is perceived as a relevant condition among anaesthesiologists, there is a high demand for implementing monitoring strategies after publishing of the POD Guideline. The survey shows that tools necessary for POD Guideline implementation are available in the centres represented by the respondents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pregnancy adds challenges for healthcare professionals, regardless of gender. We investigated experiences during pregnancy, attitudes towards pregnant colleagues, family planning decisions, and awareness of regulations among European anaesthesiologists and intensivists., Methods: A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among 3590 anaesthesiologists and intensivists from 47 European countries. The survey, available for 12 weeks, collected data on demographics, working conditions, safety perceptions, and the impact of clinical practice and training demands on family planning. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics, whereas qualitative data underwent thematic content analysis., Results: Only 41.4% (n=678) of women were satisfied with their working conditions during pregnancy, and only 38.5% (n=602) considered their working environment safe. The proportion of women who changed their clinical practice during pregnancy and who took sick leave to avoid potentially harmful working conditions increased over time (P<0.001 for both). Men had children more often during residency than women (P<0.001). Pregnant colleagues' safety concerns influenced clinical practice, with women and men who had experience with their own and partner's pregnancy being more likely to modify their practices. Work and training demands discouraged plans to have children, particularly among women, leading to consideration of leaving training. Awareness of national regulations was limited, and respondents highlighted a need for better support and flexible working conditions., Conclusions: Improved support and working environments for pregnant colleagues and ability to express preferred clinical areas for work are needed. Department heads should commit to safety and family friendliness, and men transitioning to parenthood should not be neglected., (Copyright © 2024 British Journal of Anaesthesia. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anaesthesiologists deliver an increasing amount of patient care and often work long hours in operating theatres and intensive care units, with frequent on-calls and insufficient rest in between. In the long term, this will negatively influence mental and physical health and well being. As fatigue becomes more prevalent, this has predictable implications for patient safety and clinical effectiveness. 1., Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence, severity, causes and implications of work-related fatigue amongst specialist anaesthesiologists., Design: An online survey of specialist anaesthesiologists., Participants: The survey was sent to anaesthesiologists in 42 European countries by electronic mail., Main Outcome Measures: Responses from a 36-item online survey assessed work-related fatigue and its impact on anaesthesiologists in European countries., Results: Work-related fatigue was experienced in 91.6% of the 1508 respondents from 32 European countries. Fatigue was caused by their working patterns, clinical and nonclinical workloads, staffing issues and excessive work hours. Over 70% reported that work-related fatigue negatively impacted on their physical and mental health, emotional well being and safe commuting. Most respondents did not feel supported by their organisation to maintain good health and well being., Conclusion: Work-related fatigue is a significant and widespread problem amongst anaesthesiologists. More education and increased awareness of fatigue and its adverse effects on patient safety, staff well being and physical and mental health are needed. Departments should ensure that their rotas and job plans comply with the European Working Time Directive (EWTD) and introduce a fatigue risk management system to mitigate the effects of fatigue., (Copyright © 2023 European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.)

Background: There is a growing awareness of the effects of fatigue on trainee wellbeing and health. Trainees in anaesthesiology and intensive care work long hours, switching work schedules frequently with insufficient rest. This may have unwanted long-term effects on mental and physical health and emotional well being, resulting in burnout and affecting patient safety., Objective: The study aimed to evaluate the prevalence, severity, causes and effects of work-related fatigue in trainees in anaesthesiology and intensive care., Design: Online survey of trainees in anaesthesiology and intensive care., Settings: A total of 31 countries within Europe were included in the survey., Participants: European anaesthesiology and intensive care trainees who responded to an invitation to take part by electronic mail or through social media., Main Outcome Measures: Responses from a 29-item online survey to assess the realities within European countries with regards to work-related fatigue., Results: One thousand and two hundred trainees from 31 European countries answered the survey demonstrating that an alarming number of trainees were fatigued by their working patterns and night shifts. Trainees reported effects on personal well being, safe commuting and potential for clinical errors. Respondents described a lack of support from hospitals and management for recovery during and after night shifts., Conclusion: Fatigue among trainees in anaesthesiology and intensive care has a significant impact on their well being and potentially, on the incidence of clinical errors. Current measures from authorities and hospital management are not sufficient to prevent serious fatigue, and therefore a fatigue risk management system should be considered. Failure to address this issue might lead to a further decline in trainees' wellbeing, their capacity to work in the speciality in the future, and potentially increase patient care errors., (Copyright © 2023 European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.)

Background: Anaesthesiologists and intensive care doctors have become progressively more mobile across Europe. The standardisation of training systems has been recommended by the European Union of Medical Specialist (UEMS) to facilitate the mutual recognition of professionals., Objective: We aimed to assess the level of compliance with the 2018 European training requirements (ETR) for the specialty of anaesthesiology, pain and intensive care medicine., Methods: An electronic questionnaire on the duration of the training and assessment methods in anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine was circulated via e-mail to the National Anaesthesia Societies Committee (NASC) representatives of all 41 European countries as defined by the WHO., Results: All 41 countries replied. The average duration of training was 4.7 years; in 29% of the countries, it was less than 5 years. In 78% of the countries, a mandatory written examination was required, and the most common form was a national test (44%), with only 27% using the European Diploma of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care. In the subgroup of the 26 EU countries investigated, the average duration of the training was 5 years and in 19% was less than 5 years. In the subgroup of the 15 non-EU countries, the average duration of training was 4.25 years, with 46% of the countries having a duration shorter than 5 years., Conclusions: This survey highlighted the diversity in the training in anaesthesiology and intensive care medicine in Europe despite the recommendations advocated by the EBA-UEMS. The findings on the duration of training demonstrated that the target of 5 years has not been universally achieved yet with a substantial difference between EU and non-EU countries. The presented evidence suggests the need for initiatives dedicated to implement compliance with the advocated duration and competence requirements reported in the European Training Requirement for anaesthesiology and intensive care by UEMS., (Copyright © 2022 European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.)

Objective: In this survey, we assessed the current clinical management of postoperative delirium (POD) among Chinese anesthesiologists, after publishing the European POD guideline., Methods: We administered an electronic survey, designed according to the European POD guideline. The survey was completed using mobile devices., Results: In total, 1,514 respondents from China participated in the survey. Overall, 74.4% of participants reported that delirium is very important. More than 95% of participants stated that they routinely assessed POD. In total, 61.4% screened for POD using clinical observation and 37.6% used a delirium screening tool. Although the depth of anesthesia (a POD risk factor) was monitored, electroencephalogram monitoring was unavailable to 30.6% of respondents. Regarding treatment, only 24.1% of respondents used a standard algorithm; 58.5% used individualized treatment., Conclusion: Our survey showed that there are high awareness levels among Chinese anesthesiologists regarding the importance of POD. However, routine assessment and monitoring of all patients, including perioperative anesthesia depth monitoring, and a treatment algorithm need to be implemented on a larger scale. According to the results, efforts should be made to improve the knowledge of POD among Chinese anesthesiologists.

Background: Many aspects of the perioperative management of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) remain controversial. It would be useful to assess differences in the treatment of SAH in Europe to identify areas for improvement., Objective: To determine the clinical practice of physicians treating SAH and to evaluate any discrepancy between practice and published evidence., Design: An electronic survey., Participants: Physicians identified through each national society of neuroanaesthesiology and neurocritical care., Interventions: A 31-item online questionnaire was distributed by the ENIG group. Questions were designed to investigate anaesthetic management of SAH and diagnostic and treatment approaches to cerebral vasospasm. The survey was available from early October to the end of November 2012., Results: Completed surveys were received from 268 respondents, of whom 81% replied that aneurysm treatment was conducted early (within 24 h). Sixty-five percent of centres treated more than 60% of SAH by coiling, 19% had high-volume clipping (>60% of aneurysms clipped) and 16% used both methods equally. No clear threshold for arterial blood pressure target was identified during coiling, temporary clipping or in patients without vasospasm after the aneurysm had been secured. Almost all respondents used nimodipine (97%); 21% also used statins and 20% used magnesium for prevention of vasospasm. A quarter of respondents used intra-arterial vasodilators alone, 5% used cerebral angioplasty alone and 48% used both endovascular methods to treat symptomatic vasospasm. In high-volume clipping treatment centres, 58% of respondents used endovascular methods to manage vasospasm compared with 86% at high-volume coiling treatment centres (P < 0.001). The most commonly used intra-arterial vasodilator was nimodipine (82%), but milrinone was used by 23% and papaverine by 19%. More respondents (44%) selected 'triple-H' therapy over hypertension alone (30%) to treat vasospasm., Conclusion: We found striking variability in the practice patterns of European physicians involved in early treatment of SAH. Significant differences were noted among countries and between high and low-volume coiling centres.