Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthésie
-
Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
The Canadian four-centre study of anaesthetic outcomes: III. Are anaesthetic complications predictable in day surgical practice?
To understand better the factors important to the safety of anaesthesia provided for day surgical procedures, we analyzed the intraoperative and immediate postoperative course of patients at four Canadian teaching hospitals' day treatment centres. After excluding those who received only monitored anaesthesia care, there were 6,914 adult (non-obstetrical) patients seen over a twelve-month period in 1988-89. The rate of adverse outcome consequent to their care was identified by a comprehensive surveillance system which included review of anaesthetic records (four hospitals) and follow-up telephone calls (two hospitals). ⋯ Patients judged obese, or inadequately fasted, were found to experience a greater rate of recovery problems as well as discomfort. While the low response rate (36%) to the telephone interviews created a sampling bias, the high rate of patient dissatisfaction among those reached is disconcerting. We conclude that day surgical patients with preoperative medical conditions, even when optimally managed, are at higher risk for adverse events in the perioperative period.
-
Perioperative myocardial ischaemia is common in patients who have or are at risk of coronary artery disease, occurring frequently in the pre-, intra- and postoperative periods. The majority of perioperative ischaemic episodes are silent, being unaccompanied by any symptoms of angina. ⋯ Maintenance of haemodynamic stability is important to reduce the incidence of myocardial ischemia, but ischaemia may occur in the absence of adverse haemodynamic changes. Although our efforts have largely been devoted to the prevention and treatment of intraoperative ischaemia, it is hoped that similar efforts outside the operating room in the postoperative period will further improve patient care and outcome.
-
Multicenter Study Clinical Trial
The Canadian four-centre study of anaesthetic outcomes: II. Can outcomes be used to assess the quality of anaesthesia care?
Since anaesthesia, unlike medical or surgical specialties, does not constitute treatment, this study sought to determine if methods used to assess medical or surgical outcomes (that is the determination of adverse outcome) are applicable to anaesthesia. Anaesthetists collected information on patient, surgical and anaesthetic factors while data on recovery room and postoperative events were evaluated by research nurses. Data on 27,184 inpatients were collected and the analysis of outcomes determined for the intraoperative, post-anaesthetic care unit and postoperative time periods. ⋯ Possible reasons to account for these variations in outcome include compliance in recording events, inadequate case-mix adjustment, differences in interpretation of the variables (despite guidelines) and institutional differences in monitoring, charting and observation protocols. The authors conclude that measuring quality of care in anaesthesia by comparing major outcomes is unsatisfactory since the contribution of anaesthesia to perioperative outcomes is uncertain and that variations may be explained by institutional differences which are beyond the control of the anaesthetist. It is suggested that minor adverse events, particularly those of concern to the patient, should be the next focus for quality improvement in anaesthesia.
-
Unanticipated difficulties continue to occur in airway management. While newer systems of evaluation show some promise, the problem of poor predictive value limits their usefulness. ⋯ The anaesthetist should have a clear "fall back" plan of which of these techniques to use in emergency or urgent situations. Published algorithms may aid in the selection of appropriate techniques, but the anaesthetist must also develop dexterity with the particular technique chosen.
-
Comparative Study
Tongue oximetry in children with extensive thermal injury: comparison with peripheral oximetry.
We undertook a prospective study of standard peripheral pulse oximetry versus a modified pulse oximeter probe applied to the tongue in order to determine the efficacy of this alternative monitoring site in children with thermal injuries. Ten patients with a mean age (+/- SD) of 7.5 +/- 4.5 yr were studied on 15 occasions. The mean weight (+/- SD) was 31.4 +/- 13.7 kg and percent surface area burn (+/- SD) was 56 +/- 21%. ⋯ The tongue oximeter provided 563 min more monitoring time than the peripheral sites. The tongue oximeter also functioned in children with peripheral vasoconstriction when the peripheral sensor failed and was less susceptible to electrocautery interference. The tongue oximeter is a reasonable adjunct but not a substitute for peripheral oximetry since its application is limited to paralyzed, intubated patients.