• P D Mills and J Newbury.
• Ceduna Hospital, South Australia, Australia. pdavis.mills@adelaide.edu.au
• Anaesth Intensive Care. 2012 Mar 1;40(2):328-32.

AbstractIn order to review anaesthetic morbidity in our remote rural hospital, a retrospective audit of all anaesthetic records was undertaken for a five-year period between 2006 and 2010. Eight hundred and eighty-nine anaesthetic records were reviewed. The patients were all American Society of Anaesthesiologists physical status I to III. Ninety-eight percent of the anaesthetics were performed by general practitioner (non-specialist) anaesthetists. There were no anaesthetic deaths or serious adverse outcomes reported over this period. Sixteen intraoperative and seven postoperative problems were documented, but all were resolved uneventfully. The most common problems documented were difficult intubation (n=9) and respiratory depression (n=3). Within the limitations of this retrospective audit, these findings indicate that general practitioner anaesthetists provided safe anaesthesia in a remote rural hospital. It is our opinion that the case selection, prior experience of anaesthetic and theatre staff, stable nursing workforce and the use of protocols were important factors in determining the low rate of adverse events. However, we caution against over-interpretation of the data, given its retrospective nature, relatively small sample size, reliance on case records and the absence of agreed definitions for adverse events. We would also like to encourage all anaesthetic services, however remote, to audit their results as part of ongoing quality assurance.

35 keywords...

hide…