Search

Your search keyword '"Machi, Anthony T."' showing total 19 results
Start Over Author "Machi, Anthony T."
19 results on '"Machi, Anthony T."'

4. Continuous peripheral nerve blocks in the ambulatory setting

Author

Machi, Anthony T and Ilfeld, Brian M

Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Clinical Sciences, Clinical Research, Pediatric, Patient Safety, Ambulatory Care, Ambulatory Surgical Procedures, Humans, Nerve Block, Peripheral Nerves, ambulatory continuous peripheral nerve block, ambulatory postoperative analgesia, home perineural infusion, ambulatory perineural local anesthetic infusion, perineural catheters, portable infusion pumps, Cardiorespiratory Medicine and Haematology, Public Health and Health Services, Anesthesiology, Cardiovascular medicine and haematology, Clinical sciences
Abstract

Purpose of reviewTo review the evidence recently published involving the use of continuous peripheral nerve blocks (cPNBs) in the ambulatory setting.Recent findingsNew evidence exists involving the risks and benefits of cPNB in ambulatory patient populations such as pediatric ambulatory and postmastectomy patients. In addition, new related equipment is now available to facilitate ambulatory cPNB.SummaryRecent advancements in equipment for cPNB facilitate the usage in the ambulatory setting. Research-supported ambulatory cPNB indications have expanded to include pediatric subpopulations and major breast surgery, while further evidence mounts for its efficacy in patient populations with previously demonstrated benefits, such as foot, ankle and shoulder surgery.

Published
2015

5. Continuous Adductor Canal Versus Continuous Femoral Nerve Blocks: Relative Effects on Discharge Readiness Following Unicompartment Knee Arthroplasty.

Author

Sztain, Jacklynn F, Machi, Anthony T, Kormylo, Nicholas J, Abramson, Wendy B, Madison, Sarah J, Monahan, Amanda M, Khatibi, Bahareh, Ball, Scott T, Gonzales, Francis B, Sessler, Daniel I, Mascha, Edward J, You, Jing, Nakanote, Ken A, and Ilfeld, Brian M

Subjects
Femoral Nerve, Humans, Pain, Postoperative, Pain Measurement, Treatment Outcome, Patient Discharge, Autonomic Nerve Block, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee, Prospective Studies, Pilot Projects, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Middle Aged, Female, Male, Pain, Postoperative, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee, and over, Anesthesiology, Clinical Sciences
Abstract

BackgroundWe tested the hypothesis that, following unicompartment knee arthroplasty, a continuous adductor canal block decreases the time to reach 4 discharge criteria compared with a continuous femoral nerve block.MethodsSubjects were randomized to either an adductor canal or femoral perineural catheter (2-day ropivacaine 0.2% infusion) in an unmasked fashion. The primary outcome was the time to attain 4 discharge criteria: (1) adequate analgesia; (2) intravenous opioid independence; (3) ability to independently stand, walk 3 m, return, and sit down; and (4) ambulate 30 m.ResultsSubjects with an adductor canal catheter (n = 15) reached all 4 criteria in a median of 35 hours (interquartile range, 24-43 hours), compared with 40 hours (interquartile range, 27-69 hours) for those with a femoral catheter (n = 15; Wilcoxon rank sum test: P = 0.46; log-rank test: P = 0.16). However, the percentages of subjects (adductor canal: femoral) who reached the 2 mobilization criteria were 27%:0% on postoperative day (POD) 0, 93%:53% on POD 1, and 100%:73% on POD 2. Of adductor canal subjects, 100% were discharge ready by POD 2, compared with only 73% of femoral subjects (P < 0.001).ConclusionsCompared with a continuous femoral nerve block, a continuous adductor canal block did not appreciably decrease the median number of hours to overall discharge readiness, yet did decrease the number of discrete days until discharge readiness. These results are applicable to only unicompartment knee arthroplasty and must be considered preliminary because of the limited sample size of this pilot study.

Published
2015

6. Discharge Readiness after Tricompartment Knee Arthroplasty

Author

Machi, Anthony T, Sztain, Jacklynn F, Kormylo, Nicholas J, Madison, Sarah J, Abramson, Wendy B, Monahan, Amanda M, Khatibi, Bahareh, Ball, Scott T, Gonzales, Francis B, Sessler, Daniel I, Mascha, Edward J, You, Jing, Nakanote, Ken A, and Ilfeld, Brian M

Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, Clinical Sciences, Clinical Research, Pain Research, Neurosciences, Evaluation of treatments and therapeutic interventions, 6.1 Pharmaceuticals, Aged, Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee, Autonomic Nerve Block, Catheterization, Catheters, Indwelling, Female, Femoral Nerve, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Pain, Postoperative, Patient Discharge, Ultrasonography, Anesthesiology, Clinical sciences
Abstract

BackgroundThe authors conducted a randomized, controlled, parallel-arm, superiority study to test the hypothesis that a continuous adductor canal block decreases the time to attain four discharge criteria compared with a continuous femoral nerve block after tricompartment knee arthroplasty.MethodsSubjects undergoing tricompartment knee arthroplasty were randomized using computer-generated lists to either an adductor canal or femoral perineural catheter (3-day ropivacaine 0.2% infusion) in an unmasked manner. The primary outcome was the time to attain four criteria: (1) adequate analgesia; (2) intravenous opioids independence; (3) ability to stand, walk 3 m, return, and sit down; and (4) ambulate 30 m.ResultsSubjects with an adductor canal catheter (n = 39) reached all four criteria in a median of 55 h (interquartile, 42 to 63 h) compared with 61 h (49 to 69 h) for those with a femoral catheter (n = 41; 95% CI, -13 to 1 h; P = 0.12). The percentage of subjects who reached the two mobilization criteria on postoperative days 1 and 2 were 72 and 95% for those with an adductor canal catheter (n = 39), but only 27 and 76% in subjects with a femoral catheter (n = 41; both P < 0.001). Differences in pain scores at rest and intravenous opioid requirements were minimal, but femoral infusion improved dynamic analgesia (P = 0.01 to 0.02).ConclusionCompared with a continuous femoral nerve block, a continuous adductor canal block did not appreciably decrease the time to overall discharge readiness even though it did decrease the time until adequate mobilization, primarily because both groups experienced similar analgesia and intravenous opioid requirements that--in most cases--exceeded the time to mobilization.

Published
2015

7. Anesthesia residency training in regional anesthesiology and acute pain medicine: a competency-based model curriculum

Author

Woodworth, Glenn, Maniker, Robert B, Spofford, Christina M, Ivie, Ryan, Lunden, Nathalie I, Machi, Anthony T, Elkassabany, Nabil M, Gritsenko, Karina, Kukreja, Promil, Vlassakov, Kamen, Tedore, Tiffany, Schroeder, Kris, Missair, Andres, Herrick, Michael, Shepler, John, Wilson, Elizabeth H, Horn, Jean-Louis, and Barrington, Michael

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

8. Development of entrustable professional activities for regional anesthesia and pain medicine fellowship training

Author

Porter, Steven, primary, Prendiville, Elaine, additional, Allen, Brian Frazer Scott, additional, Booth, Gregory, additional, Boublik, Jan, additional, Burnett, Garrett W, additional, Elkassabany, Nabil, additional, Hausman, Jonathan, additional, Klesius, Lisa, additional, Le-Wendling, Linda, additional, Machi, Anthony T, additional, Maniker, Robert, additional, Parra, Michelle, additional, Rosenquist, Richard, additional, Spofford, Christina M, additional, Suresh, Santhanam, additional, Tedore, Tiffany, additional, Wilson, Elizabeth H, additional, Zhou, Jon Yan, additional, and Woodworth, Glenn, additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

9. Recommendations for effective documentation in regional anesthesia: an expert panel Delphi consensus project

Author

Ahmed, Hassan M, Atterton, Benjamin P, Crowe, Gillian G, Barratta, Jaime L, Johnson, Mark, Viscusi, Eugene R., Adhikary, Sanjib, Albrecht, Eric, Boretsky, Karen, Boublik, Jan, Breslin, Dara S, Byrne, Kelly, Ch'ng, Alan, Chuan, Alwin, Conroy, Patrick, Daniel, Craig, Daszkiewicz, Andrzej, Delbos, Alain, Dirzu, Dan Sebastian, Dmytriiev, Dmytro, Fennessy, Paul, Fischer, H Barrie J, Frizelle, Henry, Gadsden, Jeff, Gautier, Philippe, Gupta, Rajnish K, Gürkan, Yavuz, Hardman, Harold David, Harrop-Griffiths, William, Hebbard, Peter, Hernandez, Nadia, Hlasny, Jakub, Iohom, Gabriella, Ip, Vivian H Y, Jeng, Christina L, Johnson, Rebecca L, Kalagara, Hari, Kinirons, Brian, Lansdown, Andrew Kenneth, Leng, Jody C, Lim, Yean Chin, Lobo, Clara, Ludwin, Danielle B, Macfarlane, Alan James Robert, Machi, Anthony T, Mahon, Padraig, Mannion, Stephen, McLeod, David H, Merjavy, Peter, Miscuks, Aleksejs, Mitchell, Christopher H, Moka, Eleni, Moran, Peter, Ngui, Ann, Nin, Olga C, O'Donnell, Brian D, Pawa, Amit, Perlas, Anahi, Porter, Steven, Pozek, John-Paul, Rebelo, Humberto C, Roqués, Vicente, Schroeder, Kristopher M, Schwartz, Gary, Schwenk, Eric S., Sermeus, Luc, Shorten, George, Srinivasan, Karthikeyan, Stevens, Markus F, Theodoraki, Kassiani, Turbitt, Lloyd R, Valdés-Vilches, Luis Fernando, Volk, Thomas, Webster, Katrina, Wiesmann, T, Wilson, Sylvia H, Wolmarans, Morné, Woodworth, Glenn, Worek, Andrew K, Moran, E M Louise, Ahmed, Hassan M, Atterton, Benjamin P, Crowe, Gillian G, Barratta, Jaime L, Johnson, Mark, Viscusi, Eugene R., Adhikary, Sanjib, Albrecht, Eric, Boretsky, Karen, Boublik, Jan, Breslin, Dara S, Byrne, Kelly, Ch'ng, Alan, Chuan, Alwin, Conroy, Patrick, Daniel, Craig, Daszkiewicz, Andrzej, Delbos, Alain, Dirzu, Dan Sebastian, Dmytriiev, Dmytro, Fennessy, Paul, Fischer, H Barrie J, Frizelle, Henry, Gadsden, Jeff, Gautier, Philippe, Gupta, Rajnish K, Gürkan, Yavuz, Hardman, Harold David, Harrop-Griffiths, William, Hebbard, Peter, Hernandez, Nadia, Hlasny, Jakub, Iohom, Gabriella, Ip, Vivian H Y, Jeng, Christina L, Johnson, Rebecca L, Kalagara, Hari, Kinirons, Brian, Lansdown, Andrew Kenneth, Leng, Jody C, Lim, Yean Chin, Lobo, Clara, Ludwin, Danielle B, Macfarlane, Alan James Robert, Machi, Anthony T, Mahon, Padraig, Mannion, Stephen, McLeod, David H, Merjavy, Peter, Miscuks, Aleksejs, Mitchell, Christopher H, Moka, Eleni, Moran, Peter, Ngui, Ann, Nin, Olga C, O'Donnell, Brian D, Pawa, Amit, Perlas, Anahi, Porter, Steven, Pozek, John-Paul, Rebelo, Humberto C, Roqués, Vicente, Schroeder, Kristopher M, Schwartz, Gary, Schwenk, Eric S., Sermeus, Luc, Shorten, George, Srinivasan, Karthikeyan, Stevens, Markus F, Theodoraki, Kassiani, Turbitt, Lloyd R, Valdés-Vilches, Luis Fernando, Volk, Thomas, Webster, Katrina, Wiesmann, T, Wilson, Sylvia H, Wolmarans, Morné, Woodworth, Glenn, Worek, Andrew K, and Moran, E M Louise

Abstract

Background and objectives: Documentation is important for quality improvement, education, and research. There is currently a lack of recommendations regarding key aspects of documentation in regional anesthesia. The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for documentation in regional anesthesia. Methods: Following the formation of the executive committee and a directed literature review, a long list of potential documentation components was created. A modified Delphi process was then employed to achieve consensus amongst a group of international experts in regional anesthesia. This consisted of 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting and a final virtual round table discussion with live polling on items not yet excluded or accepted from previous rounds. Progression or exclusion of potential components through the rounds was based on the achievement of strong consensus. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. Results: Seventy-seven collaborators participated in both rounds 1 and 2, while 50 collaborators took part in round 3. In total, experts voted on 83 items and achieved a strong consensus on 51 items, weak consensus on 3 and rejected 29. Conclusion: By means of a modified Delphi process, we have established expert consensus on documentation in regional anesthesia.

Published
2022

10. Recommendations for effective documentation in regional anesthesia: an expert panel Delphi consensus project.

Author

UCL - SSS/IONS/NEUR - Clinical Neuroscience, UCL - (SLuc) Service d'anesthésiologie, Ahmed, Hassan M, Atterton, Benjamin P, Crowe, Gillian G, Barratta, Jaime L, Johnson, Mark, Viscusi, Eugene, Adhikary, Sanjib, Albrecht, Eric, Boretsky, Karen, Boublik, Jan, Breslin, Dara S, Byrne, Kelly, Ch'ng, Alan, Chuan, Alwin, Conroy, Patrick, Daniel, Craig, Daszkiewicz, Andrzej, Delbos, Alain, Dirzu, Dan Sebastian, Dmytriiev, Dmytro, Fennessy, Paul, Fischer, H Barrie J, Frizelle, Henry, Gadsden, Jeff, Gautier, Philippe, Gupta, Rajnish K, Gürkan, Yavuz, Hardman, Harold David, Harrop-Griffiths, William, Hebbard, Peter, Hernandez, Nadia, Hlasny, Jakub, Iohom, Gabriella, Ip, Vivian H Y, Jeng, Christina L, Johnson, Rebecca L, Kalagara, Hari, Kinirons, Brian, Lansdown, Andrew Kenneth, Leng, Jody C, Lim, Yean Chin, Lobo, Clara, Ludwin, Danielle B, Macfarlane, Alan James Robert, Machi, Anthony T, Mahon, Padraig, Mannion, Stephen, McLeod, David H, Merjavy, Peter, Miscuks, Aleksejs, Mitchell, Christopher H, Moka, Eleni, Moran, Peter, Ngui, Ann, Nin, Olga C, O'Donnell, Brian D, Pawa, Amit, Perlas, Anahi, Porter, Steven, Pozek, John-Paul, Rebelo, Humberto C, Roqués, Vicente, Schroeder, Kristopher M, Schwartz, Gary, Schwenk, Eric S, Sermeus, Luc, Shorten, George, Srinivasan, Karthikeyan, Stevens, Markus F, Theodoraki, Kassiani, Turbitt, Lloyd R, Valdés-Vilches, Luis Fernando, Volk, Thomas, Webster, Katrina, Wiesmann, T, Wilson, Sylvia H, Wolmarans, Morné, Woodworth, Glenn, Worek, Andrew K, Moran, E M Louise, UCL - SSS/IONS/NEUR - Clinical Neuroscience, UCL - (SLuc) Service d'anesthésiologie, Ahmed, Hassan M, Atterton, Benjamin P, Crowe, Gillian G, Barratta, Jaime L, Johnson, Mark, Viscusi, Eugene, Adhikary, Sanjib, Albrecht, Eric, Boretsky, Karen, Boublik, Jan, Breslin, Dara S, Byrne, Kelly, Ch'ng, Alan, Chuan, Alwin, Conroy, Patrick, Daniel, Craig, Daszkiewicz, Andrzej, Delbos, Alain, Dirzu, Dan Sebastian, Dmytriiev, Dmytro, Fennessy, Paul, Fischer, H Barrie J, Frizelle, Henry, Gadsden, Jeff, Gautier, Philippe, Gupta, Rajnish K, Gürkan, Yavuz, Hardman, Harold David, Harrop-Griffiths, William, Hebbard, Peter, Hernandez, Nadia, Hlasny, Jakub, Iohom, Gabriella, Ip, Vivian H Y, Jeng, Christina L, Johnson, Rebecca L, Kalagara, Hari, Kinirons, Brian, Lansdown, Andrew Kenneth, Leng, Jody C, Lim, Yean Chin, Lobo, Clara, Ludwin, Danielle B, Macfarlane, Alan James Robert, Machi, Anthony T, Mahon, Padraig, Mannion, Stephen, McLeod, David H, Merjavy, Peter, Miscuks, Aleksejs, Mitchell, Christopher H, Moka, Eleni, Moran, Peter, Ngui, Ann, Nin, Olga C, O'Donnell, Brian D, Pawa, Amit, Perlas, Anahi, Porter, Steven, Pozek, John-Paul, Rebelo, Humberto C, Roqués, Vicente, Schroeder, Kristopher M, Schwartz, Gary, Schwenk, Eric S, Sermeus, Luc, Shorten, George, Srinivasan, Karthikeyan, Stevens, Markus F, Theodoraki, Kassiani, Turbitt, Lloyd R, Valdés-Vilches, Luis Fernando, Volk, Thomas, Webster, Katrina, Wiesmann, T, Wilson, Sylvia H, Wolmarans, Morné, Woodworth, Glenn, Worek, Andrew K, and Moran, E M Louise

Abstract

Documentation is important for quality improvement, education, and research. There is currently a lack of recommendations regarding key aspects of documentation in regional anesthesia. The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for documentation in regional anesthesia. Following the formation of the executive committee and a directed literature review, a long list of potential documentation components was created. A modified Delphi process was then employed to achieve consensus amongst a group of international experts in regional anesthesia. This consisted of 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting and a final virtual round table discussion with live polling on items not yet excluded or accepted from previous rounds. Progression or exclusion of potential components through the rounds was based on the achievement of strong consensus. Strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. Seventy-seven collaborators participated in both rounds 1 and 2, while 50 collaborators took part in round 3. In total, experts voted on 83 items and achieved a strong consensus on 51 items, weak consensus on 3 and rejected 29. By means of a modified Delphi process, we have established expert consensus on documentation in regional anesthesia.

Published
2022

11. Recommendations for effective documentation in regional anesthesia: an expert panel Delphi consensus project

Author

Gürkan, Yavuz (ORCID 0000-0002-2307-6943 & YÖK ID 154129), Ahmed, Hassan M.; Atterton, Benjamin P.; Crowe, Gillian G.; Barratta, Jaime L.; Johnson, Mark; Viscusi, Eugene; Adhikary, Sanjib; Albrecht, Eric; Boretsky, Karen; Boublik, Jan; Breslin, Dara S.; Byrne, Kelly; Ch'ng, Alan; Chuan, Alwin; Conroy, Patrick; Daniel, Craig; Daszkiewicz, Andrzej; Delbos, Alain; Dirzu, Dan Sebastian; Dmytriiev, Dmytro; Fennessy, Paul; Fischer, H. Barrie J.; Frizelle, Henry; Gadsden, Jeff; Gautier, Philippe; Gupta, Rajnish K.; Hardman, Harold David; Harrop-Griffiths, William; Hebbard, Peter; Hernandez, Nadia; Hlasny, Jakub; Iohom, Gabriella; Ip, Vivian H. Y.; Jeng, Christina L. .; Johnson, Rebecca L.; Kalagara, Hari; Kinirons, Brian; Lansdown, Andrew Kenneth; Leng, Jody C.; Lim, Yean Chin; Lobo, Clara; Ludwin, Danielle B.; Macfarlane, Alan James Robert; Machi, Anthony T.; Mahon, Padraig; Mannion, Stephen; McLeod, David H.; Merjavy, Peter; Miscuks, Aleksejs; Mitchell, Christopher H.; Moka, Eleni; Moran, Peter; Ngui, Ann; Nin, Olga C.; O'Donnell, Brian D.; Pawa, Amit; Perlas, Anahi; Porter, Steven; Pozek, John-Paul; Rebelo, Humberto C.; Roques, Vicente; Schroeder, Kristopher M.; Schwartz, Gary; Schwenk, Eric S.; Sermeus, Luc; Shorten, George; Srinivasan, Karthikeyan; Stevens, Markus F.; Theodoraki, Kassiani; Turbitt, Lloyd R.; Valdes-Vilches, Luis Fernando; Volk, Thomas; Webster, Katrina; Wiesmann, T.; Wilson, Sylvia H.; Wolmarans, Morne; Woodworth, Glenn; Worek, Andrew K.; Moran, E. M. Louise, Koç University Hospital, School of Medicine, Gürkan, Yavuz (ORCID 0000-0002-2307-6943 & YÖK ID 154129), Ahmed, Hassan M.; Atterton, Benjamin P.; Crowe, Gillian G.; Barratta, Jaime L.; Johnson, Mark; Viscusi, Eugene; Adhikary, Sanjib; Albrecht, Eric; Boretsky, Karen; Boublik, Jan; Breslin, Dara S.; Byrne, Kelly; Ch'ng, Alan; Chuan, Alwin; Conroy, Patrick; Daniel, Craig; Daszkiewicz, Andrzej; Delbos, Alain; Dirzu, Dan Sebastian; Dmytriiev, Dmytro; Fennessy, Paul; Fischer, H. Barrie J.; Frizelle, Henry; Gadsden, Jeff; Gautier, Philippe; Gupta, Rajnish K.; Hardman, Harold David; Harrop-Griffiths, William; Hebbard, Peter; Hernandez, Nadia; Hlasny, Jakub; Iohom, Gabriella; Ip, Vivian H. Y.; Jeng, Christina L. .; Johnson, Rebecca L.; Kalagara, Hari; Kinirons, Brian; Lansdown, Andrew Kenneth; Leng, Jody C.; Lim, Yean Chin; Lobo, Clara; Ludwin, Danielle B.; Macfarlane, Alan James Robert; Machi, Anthony T.; Mahon, Padraig; Mannion, Stephen; McLeod, David H.; Merjavy, Peter; Miscuks, Aleksejs; Mitchell, Christopher H.; Moka, Eleni; Moran, Peter; Ngui, Ann; Nin, Olga C.; O'Donnell, Brian D.; Pawa, Amit; Perlas, Anahi; Porter, Steven; Pozek, John-Paul; Rebelo, Humberto C.; Roques, Vicente; Schroeder, Kristopher M.; Schwartz, Gary; Schwenk, Eric S.; Sermeus, Luc; Shorten, George; Srinivasan, Karthikeyan; Stevens, Markus F.; Theodoraki, Kassiani; Turbitt, Lloyd R.; Valdes-Vilches, Luis Fernando; Volk, Thomas; Webster, Katrina; Wiesmann, T.; Wilson, Sylvia H.; Wolmarans, Morne; Woodworth, Glenn; Worek, Andrew K.; Moran, E. M. Louise, Koç University Hospital, and School of Medicine

Abstract

Background and objectives: documentation is important for quality improvement, education, and research. There is currently a lack of recommendations regarding key aspects of documentation in regional anesthesia. The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for documentation in regional anesthesia. Methods: following the formation of the executive committee and a directed literature review, a long list of potential documentation components was created. A modified Delphi process was then employed to achieve consensus amongst a group of international experts in regional anesthesia. This consisted of 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting and a final virtual round table discussion with live polling on items not yet excluded or accepted from previous rounds. Progression or exclusion of potential components through the rounds was based on the achievement of strong consensus. Strong consensus was defined as >= 75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. Results: seventy-seven collaborators participated in both rounds 1 and 2, while 50 collaborators took part in round 3. In total, experts voted on 83 items and achieved a strong consensus on 51 items, weak consensus on 3 and rejected 29. Conclusion: by means of a modified Delphi process, we have established expert consensus on documentation in regional anesthesia., European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA); ASRA Pain Medicine

Published
2022

12. Recommendations for effective documentation in regional anesthesia: an expert panel Delphi consensus project

Author

Ahmed, Hassan M, primary, Atterton, Benjamin P, additional, Crowe, Gillian G, additional, Barratta, Jaime L, additional, Johnson, Mark, additional, Viscusi, Eugene, additional, Adhikary, Sanjib, additional, Albrecht, Eric, additional, Boretsky, Karen, additional, Boublik, Jan, additional, Breslin, Dara S, additional, Byrne, Kelly, additional, Ch'ng, Alan, additional, Chuan, Alwin, additional, Conroy, Patrick, additional, Daniel, Craig, additional, Daszkiewicz, Andrzej, additional, Delbos, Alain, additional, Dirzu, Dan Sebastian, additional, Dmytriiev, Dmytro, additional, Fennessy, Paul, additional, Fischer, H Barrie J, additional, Frizelle, Henry, additional, Gadsden, Jeff, additional, Gautier, Philippe, additional, Gupta, Rajnish K, additional, Gürkan, Yavuz, additional, Hardman, Harold David, additional, Harrop-Griffiths, William, additional, Hebbard, Peter, additional, Hernandez, Nadia, additional, Hlasny, Jakub, additional, Iohom, Gabriella, additional, Ip, Vivian H Y, additional, Jeng, Christina L, additional, Johnson, Rebecca L, additional, Kalagara, Hari, additional, Kinirons, Brian, additional, Lansdown, Andrew Kenneth, additional, Leng, Jody C, additional, Lim, Yean Chin, additional, Lobo, Clara, additional, Ludwin, Danielle B, additional, Macfarlane, Alan James Robert, additional, Machi, Anthony T, additional, Mahon, Padraig, additional, Mannion, Stephen, additional, McLeod, David H, additional, Merjavy, Peter, additional, Miscuks, Aleksejs, additional, Mitchell, Christopher H, additional, Moka, Eleni, additional, Moran, Peter, additional, Ngui, Ann, additional, Nin, Olga C, additional, O'Donnell, Brian D, additional, Pawa, Amit, additional, Perlas, Anahi, additional, Porter, Steven, additional, Pozek, John-Paul, additional, Rebelo, Humberto C, additional, Roqués, Vicente, additional, Schroeder, Kristopher M, additional, Schwartz, Gary, additional, Schwenk, Eric S, additional, Sermeus, Luc, additional, Shorten, George, additional, Srinivasan, Karthikeyan, additional, Stevens, Markus F, additional, Theodoraki, Kassiani, additional, Turbitt, Lloyd R, additional, Valdés-Vilches, Luis Fernando, additional, Volk, Thomas, additional, Webster, Katrina, additional, Wiesmann, T, additional, Wilson, Sylvia H, additional, Wolmarans, Morné, additional, Woodworth, Glenn, additional, Worek, Andrew K, additional, and Moran, E M Louise, additional

Published
2022
Full Text
View/download PDF

13. Unicompartmental versus Tricompartmental Knee Arthroplasty with Continuous Adductor Canal and Femoral Nerve Blocks Analgesic Requirements and Implications for Discharge Readiness

Author

Sztain, Jacklynn, primary, Machi, Anthony T., additional, Madison, Sarah J., additional, Abramson, Wendy B., additional, Monahan, Amanda M., additional, Khatibi, Bahareh, additional, Ball, Scott T., additional, Gonzales, Francis B., additional, Donohue, Michael C., additional, Carlson, David M., additional, and Ilfeld, Brian M., additional

Published
2019
Full Text
View/download PDF

14. Discharge Readiness after Tricompartment Knee Arthroplasty: Adductor Canal versus Femoral Continuous Nerve Blocks-A Dual-center, Randomized Trial.

Author

Machi, Anthony T, Machi, Anthony T, Sztain, Jacklynn F, Kormylo, Nicholas J, Madison, Sarah J, Abramson, Wendy B, Monahan, Amanda M, Khatibi, Bahareh, Ball, Scott T, Gonzales, Francis B, Sessler, Daniel I, Mascha, Edward J, You, Jing, Nakanote, Ken A, Ilfeld, Brian M, Machi, Anthony T, Machi, Anthony T, Sztain, Jacklynn F, Kormylo, Nicholas J, Madison, Sarah J, Abramson, Wendy B, Monahan, Amanda M, Khatibi, Bahareh, Ball, Scott T, Gonzales, Francis B, Sessler, Daniel I, Mascha, Edward J, You, Jing, Nakanote, Ken A, and Ilfeld, Brian M

Abstract

BackgroundThe authors conducted a randomized, controlled, parallel-arm, superiority study to test the hypothesis that a continuous adductor canal block decreases the time to attain four discharge criteria compared with a continuous femoral nerve block after tricompartment knee arthroplasty.MethodsSubjects undergoing tricompartment knee arthroplasty were randomized using computer-generated lists to either an adductor canal or femoral perineural catheter (3-day ropivacaine 0.2% infusion) in an unmasked manner. The primary outcome was the time to attain four criteria: (1) adequate analgesia; (2) intravenous opioids independence; (3) ability to stand, walk 3 m, return, and sit down; and (4) ambulate 30 m.ResultsSubjects with an adductor canal catheter (n = 39) reached all four criteria in a median of 55 h (interquartile, 42 to 63 h) compared with 61 h (49 to 69 h) for those with a femoral catheter (n = 41; 95% CI, -13 to 1 h; P = 0.12). The percentage of subjects who reached the two mobilization criteria on postoperative days 1 and 2 were 72 and 95% for those with an adductor canal catheter (n = 39), but only 27 and 76% in subjects with a femoral catheter (n = 41; both P < 0.001). Differences in pain scores at rest and intravenous opioid requirements were minimal, but femoral infusion improved dynamic analgesia (P = 0.01 to 0.02).ConclusionCompared with a continuous femoral nerve block, a continuous adductor canal block did not appreciably decrease the time to overall discharge readiness even though it did decrease the time until adequate mobilization, primarily because both groups experienced similar analgesia and intravenous opioid requirements that--in most cases--exceeded the time to mobilization.

Published
2015

15. Continuous peripheral nerve blocks in the ambulatory setting: an update of the published evidence.

Author

Machi, Anthony T, Machi, Anthony T, Ilfeld, Brian M, Machi, Anthony T, Machi, Anthony T, and Ilfeld, Brian M

Abstract

Purpose of reviewTo review the evidence recently published involving the use of continuous peripheral nerve blocks (cPNBs) in the ambulatory setting.Recent findingsNew evidence exists involving the risks and benefits of cPNB in ambulatory patient populations such as pediatric ambulatory and postmastectomy patients. In addition, new related equipment is now available to facilitate ambulatory cPNB.SummaryRecent advancements in equipment for cPNB facilitate the usage in the ambulatory setting. Research-supported ambulatory cPNB indications have expanded to include pediatric subpopulations and major breast surgery, while further evidence mounts for its efficacy in patient populations with previously demonstrated benefits, such as foot, ankle and shoulder surgery.

Published
2015

16. Adductor Canal vs. Femoral Continuous Peripheral Nerve Blocks for Knee Arthroplasty: A One-year Follow-up Pilot Study of 2 Randomized, Controlled Clinical Trials

Author

Davidson, Evan N, primary, Machi, Anthony T, additional, Sztain, Jacklynn F, additional, Kormylo, Nicholas J, additional, Madison, Sarah J, additional, Abramson, Wendy B, additional, Monahan, Amanda M, additional, Khatibi, Bahareh, additional, Ball, Scott T, additional, Gonzales, Francis B, additional, Sessler, Daniel I, additional, and Ilfeld, Brian M, additional

Published
2018
Full Text
View/download PDF

17. Discharge Readiness After Tricompartment Knee Arthroplasty

Author

Machi, Anthony T., primary, Sztain, Jacklynn F., additional, Kormylo, Nicholas J., additional, Madison, Sarah J., additional, Abramson, Wendy B., additional, Monahan, Amanda M., additional, Khatibi, Bahareh, additional, Ball, Scott T., additional, Gonzales, Francis B., additional, Sessler, Daniel I., additional, Mascha, Edward J., additional, You, Jing, additional, Nakanote, Ken A., additional, and Ilfeld, Brian M., additional

Published
2016
Full Text
View/download PDF

19. Recommendations for effective documentation in regional anesthesia: an expert panel Delphi consensus project

Author

Hassan M Ahmed, Benjamin P Atterton, Gillian G Crowe, Jaime L Barratta, Mark Johnson, Eugene Viscusi, Sanjib Adhikary, Eric Albrecht, Karen Boretsky, Jan Boublik, Dara S Breslin, Kelly Byrne, Alan Ch'ng, Alwin Chuan, Patrick Conroy, Craig Daniel, Andrzej Daszkiewicz, Alain Delbos, Dan Sebastian Dirzu, Dmytro Dmytriiev, Paul Fennessy, H Barrie J Fischer, Henry Frizelle, Jeff Gadsden, Philippe Gautier, Rajnish K Gupta, Yavuz Gürkan, Harold David Hardman, William Harrop-Griffiths, Peter Hebbard, Nadia Hernandez, Jakub Hlasny, Gabriella Iohom, Vivian H Y Ip, Christina L Jeng, Rebecca L Johnson, Hari Kalagara, Brian Kinirons, Andrew Kenneth Lansdown, Jody C Leng, Yean Chin Lim, Clara Lobo, Danielle B Ludwin, Alan James Robert Macfarlane, Anthony T Machi, Padraig Mahon, Stephen Mannion, David H McLeod, Peter Merjavy, Aleksejs Miscuks, Christopher H Mitchell, Eleni Moka, Peter Moran, Ann Ngui, Olga C Nin, Brian D O'Donnell, Amit Pawa, Anahi Perlas, Steven Porter, John-Paul Pozek, Humberto C Rebelo, Vicente Roqués, Kristopher M Schroeder, Gary Schwartz, Eric S Schwenk, Luc Sermeus, George Shorten, Karthikeyan Srinivasan, Markus F Stevens, Kassiani Theodoraki, Lloyd R Turbitt, Luis Fernando Valdés-Vilches, Thomas Volk, Katrina Webster, T Wiesmann, Sylvia H Wilson, Morné Wolmarans, Glenn Woodworth, Andrew K Worek, E M Louise Moran, Gürkan, Yavuz (ORCID 0000-0002-2307-6943 & YÖK ID 154129), Ahmed, Hassan M., Atterton, Benjamin P., Crowe, Gillian G., Barratta, Jaime L., Johnson, Mark, Viscusi, Eugene, Adhikary, Sanjib, Albrecht, Eric, Boretsky, Karen, Boublik, Jan, Breslin, Dara S., Byrne, Kelly, Ch'ng, Alan, Chuan, Alwin, Conroy, Patrick, Daniel, Craig, Daszkiewicz, Andrzej, Delbos, Alain, Dirzu, Dan Sebastian, Dmytriiev, Dmytro, Fennessy, Paul, Fischer, H. Barrie J., Frizelle, Henry, Gadsden, Jeff, Gautier, Philippe, Gupta, Rajnish K., Hardman, Harold David, Harrop-Griffiths, William, Hebbard, Peter, Hernandez, Nadia, Hlasny, Jakub, Iohom, Gabriella, Ip, Vivian H. Y., Jeng, Christina L. ., Johnson, Rebecca L., Kalagara, Hari, Kinirons, Brian, Lansdown, Andrew Kenneth, Leng, Jody C., Lim, Yean Chin, Lobo, Clara, Ludwin, Danielle B., Macfarlane, Alan James Robert, Machi, Anthony T., Mahon, Padraig, Mannion, Stephen, McLeod, David H., Merjavy, Peter, Miscuks, Aleksejs, Mitchell, Christopher H., Moka, Eleni, Moran, Peter, Ngui, Ann, Nin, Olga C., O'Donnell, Brian D., Pawa, Amit, Perlas, Anahi, Porter, Steven, Pozek, John-Paul, Rebelo, Humberto C., Roques, Vicente, Schroeder, Kristopher M., Schwartz, Gary, Schwenk, Eric S., Sermeus, Luc, Shorten, George, Srinivasan, Karthikeyan, Stevens, Markus F., Theodoraki, Kassiani, Turbitt, Lloyd R., Valdes-Vilches, Luis Fernando, Volk, Thomas, Webster, Katrina, Wiesmann, T., Wilson, Sylvia H., Wolmarans, Morne, Woodworth, Glenn, Worek, Andrew K., Moran, E. M. Louise, Koç University Hospital, School of Medicine, UCL - SSS/IONS/NEUR - Clinical Neuroscience, UCL - (SLuc) Service d'anesthésiologie, Anesthesiology, APH - Quality of Care, and Amsterdam Neuroscience - Neuroinfection & -inflammation

Subjects
Consensus, neuraxial, Delphi Technique, education, General Medicine, Documentation, international consensus, anesthesia, documentation, nerve block, Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Anesthesiology, Anesthesia, Conduction, Nerve block, Regional anesthesia, Anesthesia, Neuraxial, Minimum standards, Delphi process, Humans, regional anesthesia, minimum standards
Abstract

Background and objectives: documentation is important for quality improvement, education, and research. There is currently a lack of recommendations regarding key aspects of documentation in regional anesthesia. The aim of this study was to establish recommendations for documentation in regional anesthesia. Methods: following the formation of the executive committee and a directed literature review, a long list of potential documentation components was created. A modified Delphi process was then employed to achieve consensus amongst a group of international experts in regional anesthesia. This consisted of 2 rounds of anonymous electronic voting and a final virtual round table discussion with live polling on items not yet excluded or accepted from previous rounds. Progression or exclusion of potential components through the rounds was based on the achievement of strong consensus. Strong consensus was defined as >= 75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%-74% agreement. Results: seventy-seven collaborators participated in both rounds 1 and 2, while 50 collaborators took part in round 3. In total, experts voted on 83 items and achieved a strong consensus on 51 items, weak consensus on 3 and rejected 29. Conclusion: by means of a modified Delphi process, we have established expert consensus on documentation in regional anesthesia., European Society of Regional Anaesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA); ASRA Pain Medicine

Published
2022

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results