Anaesthesia
-
Multicenter Study Controlled Clinical Trial
Clinical assessment of a new anaesthetic drug administration system: a prospective, controlled, longitudinal incident monitoring study.
An interesting and thought-provoking study, even with its flaws.
The authors concluded that system changes surrounding anaesthetic drug delivery reduce medication error.
A ‘care bundle’ approach was taken to improve drug safety through system design and human factors considerations:
- Coloured drug labels with barcodes.
- Computerised drug crosscheck.
- Computerised allergy and drug expiration alerts.
- Re-organised anaesthesia workplace, focusing on the drug administration workflow.
- Prefilled syringes for: calcium chloride, ephredrine, fentanyl, lidocaine, magnesium sulphate, metaraminol, midazolam, neostigmine, and pancuronium.
- Automated computerised anaesthetic record.
But the problems...
No randomisation, no blinding, observational study, completely voluntary use of the safety system and self-reporting of errors...
Were the improvements due to the intervention, or simply a greater interest and priority given to anaesthetic safety? (Would it matter?)
In only 15% of anaesthetics was the new system (voluntarily) used, and thus may represent anaesthetists more motivated to prioritise medication safety over convenience or convention.
Finally error is being used (not unreasonably) as a surrogate marker for patient harm. (Although the authors did try to sneak in... “a non-significant reduction (p=0.055) in the harm attributable to drug administration error” 🙄)
Final word of caution
Even this quite impressive system was not immune to error. There were 19 cases of violation of the video and/or audio crosscheck before drug administration. Automated safety systems are obviously no panacea.
Additionally, although there was an observed reduction in all drug errors, there was no reduction specifically in drug substitution error.
Nonetheless a refreshing and novel approach to anaesthetic drug safety, beyond the typical admonishment to just be safer.
More on the system used:
- Webster (2001): The frequency and nature of drug administration error during anaesthesia
- Merry (2001): A new, safety-oriented, integrated drug administration and automated anesthesia record system
- Webster (2004): A prospective, randomised clinical evaluation of a new safety-orientated injectable drug administration system in comparison with conventional methods.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Comparison of the prophylactic anti-emetic efficacy of ramosetron and ondansetron in patients at high-risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting after total knee replacement.
We compared the prophylactic anti-emetic efficacy of ramosetron, a newly developed 5-HT(3) antagonist, and ondansetron in patients at high-risk for postoperative nausea and vomiting after total knee replacement. Eighty-four patients with three risk factors for postoperative nausea and vomiting (female, non-smoking and use of postoperative opioid use (ropivacaine and hydromorphone patient controlled epidural analgesia)) undergoing unilateral total knee replacement were randomly allocated to ramosetron 0.3 mg (n = 42) or ondansetron 4 mg (n = 42) groups. ⋯ The incidence of nausea between 2 and 24 h and the severity of nausea between 2 and 48 h were also less in the ramosetron group. Ramosetron was more effective than ondansetron in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients at high risk undergoing unilateral total knee replacement.
-
Multicenter Study
The use of capnography and the availability of airway equipment on Intensive Care Units in the UK and the Republic of Ireland.
At least 20% of reported major adverse airway events occur on the intensive care unit. This study surveyed 315 (96%) of all general, satellite, hepatobiliary, cardiac and neuro-intensive care units in the UK and the Republic of Ireland, finding that only 100 (32%) units always use capnography for tracheal intubation while only 80 (25%) always use capnography for continuous monitoring of patients requiring controlled ventilation. ⋯ Whilst 297 (94%) ICUs have an airway trolley, sufficient equipment for unanticipated difficult intubation was only seen on 33 (10%) of units. Guidelines addressing minimum standards for monitoring and airway safety on ICU are not being met and remain below the standard expected.
-
We analysed 366 claims related to regional anaesthesia and analgesia from the 841 anaesthesia-related claims handled by the National Health Service Litigation Authority between 1995 and 2007. The majority of claims (281/366, 77%) were closed at the time of analysis. The total cost of closed claims was pound12,724,017 (34% of the cost of the anaesthesia dataset) with a median (IQR [range]) of pound4772 (pound0-28,907 [pound0-2,070,092]). ⋯ Non-obstetric claims were more likely to relate to severe outcomes than obstetric ones. The maximum values of claims were higher for claims related to neuraxial blocks and eye blocks than for peripheral nerve blocks. Despite many limitations, including lack of clinical detail for each case, the dataset provides a useful overview of the extent, patterns and cost associated with the claims.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Comparison of the C-MAC videolaryngoscope with the Macintosh, Glidescope, and Airtraq laryngoscopes in easy and difficult laryngoscopy scenarios in manikins.
The C-MAC comprises a Macintosh blade connected to a video unit. The familiarity of the Macintosh blade, and the ability to use the C-MAC as a direct or indirect laryngoscope, may be advantageous. We wished to compare the C-MAC with Macintosh, Glidescope and Airtraq laryngoscopes in easy and simulated difficult laryngoscopy. ⋯ In difficult laryngo-scopy the C-MAC demonstrated the shortest tracheal intubation times. The Airtraq provided the best glottic view, with the Macintosh providing the worst view. The C-MAC was the easiest device to use.