Anaesthesia
-
Review Comparative Study
Anatomic accuracy of airway training manikins compared with humans.
Airway simulators, or training manikins, are frequently used in research studies for device development and training purposes. This study was designed to determine the anatomic accuracy of the most frequently used low-fidelity airway training manikins. Computerised tomography scans and ruler measurements were taken of the SynDaver® , Laerdal® and AirSim® manikins. ⋯ All three manikins were visually identifiable as outliers when plotting the first two dimensions from multidimensional scaling. In particular, the airway space between the epiglottis and posterior pharyngeal wall, through which airway devices must pass, was too large in all three manikins. SynDaver, Laerdal and AirSim manikins do not have anatomically correct static dimensions in relation to humans and these inaccuracies may lead to imprecise airway device development, negatively affect training and cause over-confidence in users.
-
Our study investigated whether pre-operative screening and treatment for anaemia and suboptimal iron stores in a patient blood management clinic is cost effective. We used outcome data from a retrospective cohort study comparing colorectal surgery patients admitted pre- and post-implementation of a pre-operative screening programme. We applied propensity score weighting techniques with multivariable regression models to adjust for differences in baseline characteristics between groups. ⋯ The mean difference in total screening, treatment and hospitalisation cost between groups was AU$3776 lower in the group screened (£2080; US$2629; €2325) (95%CI AU$1604-5947, p < 0.001). Screening elective patients pre-operatively for anaemia and suboptimal iron stores reduced the number of red cell units transfused. It also resulted in lower total costs than not screening patients, thus demonstrating cost effectiveness.
-
Multicenter Study
The effect of COVID-19 on general anaesthesia rates for caesarean section. A cross sectional analysis of six hospitals in the north-west of England.
At the onset of the global pandemic of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2), guidelines recommended using regional anaesthesia for caesarean section in preference to general anaesthesia. National figures from the UK suggest that 8.75% of over 170,000 caesarean sections are performed under general anaesthetic. We explored whether general anaesthesia rates for caesarean section changed during the peak of the pandemic across six maternity units in the north-west of England. ⋯ Obstetric indications for caesarean sections did not change (p = 0.17) while the overall caesarean section rate increased (28.3 to 29.7%), risk ratio (95%CI) 1.02 (1.00-1.04), p = 0.052. Our analysis shows that general anaesthesia rates for caesarean section declined during the peak of the pandemic. Anaesthetic decision-making, recommendations from anaesthetic guidelines and presence of an on-site anaesthetic consultant in the delivery suite seem to be the key factors that influenced this decline.