Airway Injury during Anesthesia 

1999 ◽  
Vol 91 (6) ◽  
pp. 1703-1703 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen B. Domino ◽  
Karen L. Posner ◽  
Robert A. Caplan ◽  
Frederick W. Cheney
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Difficult Intubation ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Insurance Companies ◽  
Retropharyngeal Abscess ◽  
Airway Injury ◽  
American Society ◽  
Closed Claims ◽  
Recurrent Patterns

Background Airway injury during general anesthesia is a significant source of morbidity for patients and a source of liability for anesthesiologists. To identify recurrent patterns of injury, the authors analyzed claims for airway injury in the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Closed Claims Project database. Methods The ASA Closed Claims database is a standardized collection of case summaries derived from professional liability insurance companies closed claims files. All claims for airway injury were reviewed in depth and were compared to other claims during general anesthesia. Results Approximately 6% (266) of 4,460 claims in the database were for airway injury. The most frequent sites of injury were the larynx (33%), pharynx (19%), and esophagus (18%). Injuries to the esophagus and trachea were more frequently associated with difficult intubation. Injuries to temporomandibular joint and the larynx were more frequently associated with nondifficult intubation. Injuries to the esophagus were more severe and resulted in a higher payment to the plaintiff than claims for other sites of airway injury. Difficult intubation (odds ratio = 4.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.36, 8.71), age older than 60 yr (odds ratio = 2.97, 95% CI = 1.51, 5.87), and female gender (odds ratio = 2.43, 95% CI = 1.09, 5.42) were associated with claims for pharyngoesophageal perforation. Early signs of perforation, e.g., pneumothorax and subcutaneous emphysema, were present in only 51% of perforation claims, whereas late sequelae, e.g., retropharyngeal abscess and mediastinitis, occurred in 65%. Conclusion Patients in whom tracheal intubation has been difficult should be observed for and told to watch for the development of symptoms and signs of retropharyngeal abscess, mediastinitis, or both.

Nerve Injury Associated with Anesthesia 

1999 ◽  
Vol 90 (4) ◽  
pp. 1062-1069 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick W. Cheney ◽  
Karen B. Domino ◽  
Robert A. Caplan ◽  
Karen L. Posner
Keyword(s):  
Spinal Cord ◽  
Nerve Injury ◽  
Ulnar Nerve ◽  
Nerve Root ◽  
Spinal Cord Injuries ◽  
Insurance Companies ◽  
Initial Report ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
American Society ◽  
Closed Claims

Background Nerve injury associated with anesthesia is a significant source of morbidity for patients and liability for anesthesiologists. To identify recurrent and emerging patterns of injury we analyzed the current American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Closed Claims Project Database and performed an in-depth analysis of claims for nerve injury that were entered into the database since the authors' initial report of the subject. Methods The ASA Closed Claims Database is a standardized collection of case summaries derived from the closed claims files of professional liability insurance companies. Claims for nerve injury that were not included in the authors' 1990 report were reviewed in-depth. Results Six hundred seventy (16% of 4,183) claims were for anesthesia-related nerve injury. The most frequent sites of injury were the ulnar nerve (28%), brachial plexus (20%), lumbosacral nerve root (16%), and spinal cord (13%). Ulnar nerve (85%) injuries were more likely to have occurred in association with general anesthesia, whereas spinal cord (58%) and lumbosacral nerve root (92%) injuries were more likely to occur with regional techniques. Ulnar nerve injury occurred predominately in men (75%) and was also more apt to have a delayed onset of symptoms (62%) than other nerve injuries. Spinal cord injuries were the leading cause of claims for nerve injury that occurred in the 1990s. Conclusion New strategies for prevention of nerve damage cannot be recommended at this time because the mechanism for most injuries, particularly those of the ulnar nerve, is not apparent.

Awareness during Anesthesia 

1999 ◽  
Vol 90 (4) ◽  
pp. 1053-1061 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen B. Domino ◽  
Karen L. Posner ◽  
Robert A. Caplan ◽  
Frederick W. Cheney
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Anesthetic Techniques ◽  
Post Traumatic Stress ◽  
Intraoperative Awareness ◽  
Malpractice Claims ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
American Society ◽  
Closed Claims ◽  
American Society Of Anesthesiologists

Background Awareness during general anesthesia is a frightening experience, which may result in serious emotional injury and post-traumatic stress disorder. We performed an in-depth analysis of cases from the database of the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project to explore the contribution of intraoperative awareness to professional liability in anesthesia. Methods The database of the Closed Claims Project is composed of closed US malpractice claims that have been collected in a standardized manner. All claims for intraoperative awareness were reviewed by the reviewers to identify patterns of causation and standard of care. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent patient and anesthetic factors associated with claims for recall during general anesthesia compared to other general anesthesia malpractice claims. Results Awareness claims accounted for 79 (1.9%) of 4,183 claims in the database, including 18 claims for awake paralysis, i.e., the inadvertent paralysis of an awake patient, and 61 claims for recall during general anesthesia, ie., recall of events while receiving general anesthesia. The majority of awareness claims involved women (77%), younger than 60 yr of age (89%), American Society of Anesthesiologists physical class I-II (68%), who underwent elective surgery (87%). Most (94%) claims for awake paralysis represented substandard care involving errors in labeling and administration, whereas care was substandard in only 43% of the claims for recall during general anesthesia (P < 0.001). Claims for recall during general anesthesia were more likely to involve women (odds ratio [OR] = 3.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.58, 6.06) and anesthetic techniques using intraoperative opioids (OR = 2.12, 95% CI = 1.20, 3.74), intraoperative muscle relaxants (OR = 2.28, 95% CI = 1.22, 4.25), and no volatile anesthetic (OR = 3.20, 95% CI = 1.88, 5.46). Conclusions Deficiencies in labeling and vigilance were common causes for awake paralysis. Claims for recall during general anesthesia were more likely in women and with nitrous-narcotic-relaxant techniques.

scholarly journals Reliable and rapid smooth extubation after Ketofol for induction of general anesthesia in Laparoscopic Drilling of polycystic ovary: A randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Atef Mohamed Sayed Mahmoud ◽  
Joseph Makram Botros ◽  
Safaa Gaber Ragab
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Polycystic Ovary ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Airway Response ◽  
American Society ◽  
American Society Of Anesthesiologists ◽  
Better Than

Abstract Background the outcome of ketofol on the hemodynamics and the airway response during induction of general anesthesia has been studied before. Its effect on smoothness of extubation has not been studied before. So, we aimed to assess the effect of ketofol on the smoothness of extubation and compare it with propofol only for induction of general anesthesia. Methods This double-blind, randomized, and controlled study was conducted on one hundred and six American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical status ''ASA PS'' class I and II female patients aged 18–40 years old and scheduled for laparoscopic drilling for polycystic ovary disease under general anesthesia. The patients were assigned into one of two groups (53) patients each; group KP = ketofol and group P = propofol. Results There was good sedation score during suction and extubation in the ketofol group. Airway response and smoothness of extubation were better in the ketofol group better than the propofol group. Conclusion Ketofol as an induction anesthetic agent was effective in attenuating the airway response during extubation more than profofol only. Trial registration: This trial was retrospectively registered at the Clinical Trial.gov with the Identification Number: NCT04365686.

scholarly journals PREWARMING FOR PREVENTION OF PERIOPERATIVE HYPOTHERMIA IN PATIENTS WITH COMBINED EPIDURAL AND GENERAL ANESTHESIA: A RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dang Tinh Pham ◽  
Thi Ngoc Le ◽  
Ton Ngoc Vu Phan ◽  
Parshal Bhandari ◽  
Sairah Zia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Controlled Trial ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Outcome Measures ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Perioperative Hypothermia ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Physical Status Classification ◽  
American Society

OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to access the influence of active warming after epidural anesthesia (EDA) and before general anesthesia in prevention of perioperative hypothermia. METHOD This randomized controlled trial was conducted in the department of anesthesiology in university medical center of Ho Chi Minh city, Vietnam from December 2019 until April 2020. This trial included 60 adult patients who were scheduled for major abdominal surgery with a duration of at least 120 minutes and under combined general anesthesia and EDA. Patients were excluded if age was below 18 years, American Society Anesthesiologists’ physical status classification of IV or higher, or refusal of EDA. Written informed consent was obtained for all patients. Patients were divided randomly into two groups. The first group received 10 minutes of active air-forced warming after EDA before the induction of general anesthesia. The second group was covered with a blanket 10 minutes after EDA and before general anesthesia. Core temperatures were recorded throughout the study. The primary outcome measures were the incidence of perioperative hypothermia and the degree of hypothermia. The secondary outcome measures were rate and time for body temperature to return to normal and incidence of postoperative body shivering. RESULTS Without active warming (n = 21), 70% of patients became hypothermic (<36°C) postoperatively. Active air-forced warming for 10 minutes after EDA and before induction of general anesthesia decreased the incidence of postoperative hypothermia to 26.7% (n = 8). CONCLUSION Active air-forced warming for 10 minutes after EDA and before induction of general anesthesia is efficient in reducing the incidence of perioperative hypothermia.

scholarly journals Discordant American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Scoring between Anesthesiologists and Surgeons Is Correlated With Adverse Patient Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study of 46284 Elective Surgical Patients

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charlene Xian Wen Kwa ◽  
Jiaqian Cui ◽  
Daniel Yan Zheng Lim ◽  
Yilin Eileen Sim ◽  
Yuhe Ke ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cohort Study ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Real World ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Retrospective Cohort ◽  
Clinical Factors ◽  
Physical Status ◽  
Asa Score ◽  
American Society ◽  
American Society Of Anesthesiologists

Abstract BackgroundThe American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA) score is used for communication of patient health status, risk scoring, benchmarking and financial claims. Prior studies using hypothetical scenarios have shown poor concordance of ASA scoring among healthcare providers. However, there is a paucity of concordance studies using real-world data, as well as studies of clinical factors or patient outcomes associated with discordant scoring. The study aims to assess real-world ASA score concordance between surgeons and anesthesiologists, factors surrounding discordance and its impact on patient outcomes. MethodsThis retrospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary academic medical center on 46284 consecutive patients undergoing elective surgery between January 2017 and December 2019. ASA scores entered by surgeons and anesthesiologists, patient demographics, and post-operative outcomes were collected. We assessed the concordance of preoperative ASA scoring between surgeons and anesthesiologists, clinical factors associated with score discordance, the impact of score discordance on clinically important outcomes, and the discriminative ability of the two scores for 30-day mortality, 1-year mortality, and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. Statistical tests used included Cohen’s weighted 𝜅 score, chi-square test, t-test, unadjusted odds ratios and logistic regression models. ResultsThe ASA score showed moderate concordance (weighted Cohen’s 𝜅 0.53) between surgeons and anesthesiologists. 15098 patients (32.6%) had discordant scores, of which 11985 (79.4%) were scored lower by surgeons. We found significant associations between discordant scores and anesthesiologist-assessed comorbidities, patient age and race. Patients with discordant scores had a higher risk of 30-day mortality (odds ratio 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.52-2.62, p<0.0001), 1-year mortality (odds ratio 1.53, 95% CI = 1.38-1.69, p < 0.0001), and ICU admission >24 hours (odds ratio 1.69, 95% CI = 1.47-1.94, p< 0.0001), and stratified analyses showed a trend towards higher risk when the surgeons’ ASA score was lower. ConclusionsThere is moderate concordance between surgeons and anesthesiologists in assigning the ASA classification. Discordant ASA scores are associated with adverse patient outcomes. Hence, there is a need for improved standardization of ASA scoring and cross-specialty review in ASA-discordant cases.

Are Guidelines Important? Results of a Prospective Quality Improvement Lumbar Fusion Project

Neurosurgery ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Harrop ◽  
Alexandra Emes ◽  
Ameet Chitale ◽  
Chengyuan Wu ◽  
Fadi Al Saiegh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Lumbar Fusion ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Multiple Logistic Regression ◽  
Surgical Indications ◽  
American Society ◽  
American Society Of Anesthesiologists ◽  
Based Medicine

Abstract BACKGROUND United States (U.S.) healthcare is a volume-based inefficient delivery system. Value requires the consideration of quality, which is lacking in most healthcare disciplines. OBJECTIVE To assess whether patients who met specific evidence-based medicine (EBM)-based criteria preoperatively for lumbar fusion would achieve higher rates of achieving the minimal clinical important difference (MCID) than those who did not meet the EBM indications. METHODS All elective lumbar fusion cases, March 2018 to August 2019, were prospectively evaluated and categorized based on EBM guidelines for surgical indications. The MCID was defined as a reduction of ≥5 points in Oswestry Disability Index (ODI). Multiple logistic regression identified multivariable-adjusted odds ratio of EBM concordance. RESULTS A total of 325 lumbar fusion patients were entered with 6-mo follow-up data available for 309 patients (95%). The median preoperative ODI score was 24.4 with median 6-mo improvement of 7.0 points (P &lt; .0001). Based on ODI scores, 79.6% (246/309) improved, 3.8% (12/309) had no change, and 16% (51/309) worsened. A total of 191 patients had ODI improvement reaching the MCID. 93.2% (288/309) cases were EBM concordant, while 6.7% (21/309) were not. In multivariate analysis, EBM concordance (P = .0338), lower preoperative ODI (P &lt; .001), lower ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) (P = .0056), and primary surgeries (P = .0004) were significantly associated with improved functional outcome. EBM concordance conferred a 3.04 (95% CI 1.10-8.40) times greater odds of achieving MCID in ODI at 6 mo (P = .0322), adjusting for other factors. CONCLUSION This analysis provides validation of EBM guideline criteria to establish optimal patient outcomes. The EBM concordant patients had a greater than 3 times improved outcome compared to those not meeting EBM fusion criteria.

Abstract 359: Unit-Specific Influences on Conscious Sedation Nursing Practices: Comparing Medication Utilization and Patient Outcomes

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (Suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Parone ◽  
Sahil Rawal ◽  
Allison Ellis ◽  
Bryant Peterson ◽  
Lourdes Escalante ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Conscious Sedation ◽  
Adverse Outcomes ◽  
P Value ◽  
Medication Utilization ◽  
American Society ◽  
Cardiac Catherization

Background: Unit-Specific influences may determine the amount of sedation given to patients and lead to deviations in patient satisfaction and clinical outcomes due to vague guidelines (4). This study aims to compare medication utilization, clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction in order to determine safety and efficacy of nurse administrated conscious sedation. Methods: Data from outpatient procedures in Cardiac Catherization Lab (Cath Lab) and Interventional Radiology (IR) departments were collected including comorbidities, labs, procedural characteristics, clinical outcomes, and post-sedation questionnaires. Results: Mean age was 63 ± 14 years and 124 (54.9%) were males. Cath Lab n=132 and IR n=94. Procedure duration(min) was found to be longer in the Cath Lab 55 (37,81), than in IR 24 (16,45), p-value of <0.001. The American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) scores of Cath Lab 26(21%), IR 29(30.9%), p-value (0.1). Total amount of versed (mg) given in the Cath Lab 2 (1,2), significantly less than IR 3 (1,4.5) with a p-value of <0.01. Total amount of fentanyl (mcg) for Cath Lab 50(50,100), and IR 100 (50,100) with a p-value of <0.01. Median time between 1 st and 2 nd dose of versed in Cath Lab 0 (0,1), IR 9 (5, 16). Median time between 2 nd and 3 rd dose of versed for Cath Lab 0 (0,0), IR 6 (0,13.5) with a p-value <0.001. Median time between 1 st and 2 nd dose of fentanyl in Cath Lab 1 (0,14.8), IR 12.5 (6.8, 24) with a p-value <0.001. Median time between 2 nd and 3 rd dose of fentanyl for Cath Lab 0 (0,0), IR 0,(0,15), p-value <0.001. Median second dose of versed in Cath Lab 0 (0,1), IR 1 (1,1). Median second dose of fentanyl in Cath Lab 25 0 (0,25), IR 25 (25,50), p-value <0.001. Post-Sedation Questionnaire completed by 57 patients, Cath Lab n=30, IR n=27. Patients that felt uncomfortable during their procedure in Cath Lab 11(36.7%), compared to IR 1 (3.7%). The choice of sedation that patient would choose if undergoing a similar procedure again if under general anesthesia Cath Lab 6(20%), IR 0(0%), p-value 0.03. Patients stated that they would recommend conscious sedation to others based on their previous experience, Cath Lab 24 (80%), IR 27(100%). Conclusion: Patients receiving conscious sedation while undergoing procedures in both the Cath Lab and IR were found to have no adverse outcomes and were considered safe. The procedural duration of catheterization procedures was significantly longer than IR with no adverse outcomes, but patients in the Cath lab received less sedation medication and were found to be less satisfied with their procedure. Patients from Cath Lab received less initial sedation medication and rarely received an additional dose. Cath Lab patients were more likely to not recommended conscious sedation to others (20%), and 6 (20%) stated they would rather undergo a similar procedure under general anesthesia; 36.7% of Cath Lab patients stated that they were uncomfortable during the procedure.

scholarly journals Anesthesiologist Specialization and Use of General Anesthesia for Cesarean Delivery

2019 ◽  
Vol 130 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin T. Cobb ◽  
Meghan B. Lane-Fall ◽  
Richard C. Month ◽  
Onyi C. Onuoha ◽  
Sindhu K. Srinivas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Cesarean Delivery ◽  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Adjusted Odds Ratio ◽  
Medical Center ◽  
Academic Medical Center ◽  
Obstetric Anesthesia ◽  
Epidural Block ◽  
Cesarean Deliveries

AbstractEditor’s PerspectiveWhat We Already Know about This TopicWhat This Manuscript Tells Us That Is NewBackgroundGuidelines for obstetric anesthesia recommend neuraxial anesthesia (i.e., spinal or epidural block) for cesarean delivery in most patients. Little is known about the association of anesthesiologist specialization in obstetric anesthesia with a patient’s likelihood of receiving general anesthesia. The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare utilization of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery among patients treated by generalist versus obstetric-specialized anesthesiologists.MethodsThe authors studied patients undergoing cesarean delivery for live singleton pregnancies from 2013 through 2017 at one academic medical center. Data were extracted from the electronic medical record. The authors estimated the association of anesthesiologist specialization in obstetric anesthesia with the odds of receiving general anesthesia for cesarean delivery.ResultsOf the cesarean deliveries in our sample, 2,649 of 4,052 (65.4%) were performed by obstetric-specialized anesthesiologists, and 1,403 of 4,052 (34.6%) by generalists. Use of general anesthesia differed for patients treated by specialists and generalists (7.3% vs. 12.1%; P &lt; 0.001). After adjustment, the odds of receiving general anesthesia were lower among patients treated by obstetric-specialized anesthesiologists among all patients (adjusted odds ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.55 to 0.92; P = 0.011), and in a subgroup analysis restricted to urgent or emergent cesarean deliveries (adjusted odds ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.99; P = 0.049). There was no association between provider specialization and the odds of receiving general anesthesia in a subgroup analysis restricted to evening or weekend deliveries (adjusted odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.03; P = 0.085).ConclusionsTreatment by an obstetric anesthesiologist was associated with lower odds of receiving general anesthesia for cesarean delivery; however, this finding did not persist in a subgroup analysis restricted to evening and weekend deliveries.

Chemotherapy Near the End of Life in Onco–Hematological Adult Patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 37 (8) ◽  
pp. 641-647
Author(s):  
Marina Sánchez-Cuervo ◽  
Lorena García-Basas ◽  
Esther Gómez de Salazar-López de Silanes ◽  
Cristina Pueyo-López ◽  
Teresa Bermejo-Vicedo
Keyword(s):  
Observational Study ◽  
End Of Life ◽  
End Of Life Care ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Chemotherapy Regimen ◽  
Female Gender ◽  
Tertiary Hospital ◽  
Life Care ◽  
Oncological Patients ◽  
Scarce Data

Objective: The use of chemotherapy near the end of life is not advisable. There are scarce data in Europe but shows signs of aggressiveness. We designed this study to analyze the proportion of onco–hematological patients receiving chemotherapy within their last 2 weeks of life as well as starting a new chemotherapy regimen in the 30 days prior to death. Methods: A retrospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary hospital. Adults who died of an onco-hematological neoplasia while hospitalized between April 2017 and March 2018 were included. We assessed the use of chemotherapy over the course of the last 14 days of life, defined as the administration of at least one dose of chemotherapy. We also examined the proportion of patients starting a new chemotherapy regimen in the last 30 days of life. Results: A total of 298 inpatients died in the Hematology and Oncology units. During the last 14 days, 28.2% (n = 11) of hematological and 26.3% (n = 68) of oncological patients received chemotherapy; the overall rate was 26.5% (n = 79). Furthermore, the proportion of patients starting a new chemotherapy regimen in the last 30 days of life was high (20.5% and 20.8%, respectively). Female gender (odds ratio [OR] = 1.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.18-3.35) and age <45 (OR = 2.68, 95% CI = 1.05-6.88) were associated with higher rates of chemotherapy. Conclusion: The proportion of patients receiving chemotherapy in the last 14 days of life was high, as well as the proportion of patients starting a new regimen in their last 30 days. This was indicative of excessive aggressiveness at the end-of-life care.

scholarly journals Autopsy Utilization in Medicolegal Defense of Anesthesiologists

2011 ◽  
Vol 115 (4) ◽  
pp. 713-717 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorri A. Lee ◽  
Linda S. Stephens ◽  
Corinne L. Fligner ◽  
Karen L. Posner ◽  
Frederick W. Cheney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cause Of Death ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Chi Square ◽  
Autopsy Findings ◽  
New Information ◽  
Malpractice Claims ◽  
Hospital Deaths ◽  
American Society ◽  
Chi Square Analysis ◽  
Closed Claims

Background The rate of autopsy in hospital deaths has declined from more than 50% to 2.4% over the past 50 yr. To understand the role of autopsies in anesthesia malpractice claims, we examined 980 closed claims for deaths that occurred in 1990 or later in the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Project Database. Methods Deaths with autopsy were compared with deaths without autopsy. Deaths with autopsy were evaluated to answer the following four questions: Did autopsy findings establish a cause of death? Did autopsy provide new information? Did autopsy identify a significant nonanesthetic contribution to death? Did autopsy help or hurt the defense of the anesthesiologist? Reliability was assessed by κ scores. Differences between groups were compared with chi-square analysis and Kolmogorov-Smirnov test with P &lt; 0.05 for statistical significance. Results Autopsies were performed in 551 (56%) of 980 claims for death. Evaluable autopsy information was available in 288 (52%) of 551 claims with autopsy. Patients in these 288 claims were younger and healthier than those in claims for death without autopsy (P &lt; 0.01). Autopsy provided pathologic diagnoses and an unequivocal cause of death in 21% of these 288 claims (κ= 0.71). An unexpected pathologic diagnosis was found in 50% of claims with evaluable autopsy information (κ = 0.59). Autopsy identified a significant nonanesthetic contribution in 61% (κ = 0.64) of these 288 claims. Autopsy helped in the defense of the anesthesiologist in 55% of claims and harmed the defense in 27% (κ = 0.58) of claims with evaluable autopsy information. Conclusions Autopsy findings were more often helpful than harmful in the medicolegal defense of anesthesiologists. Autopsy identified a significant nonanesthetic contribution to death in two thirds of claims with evaluable autopsy information.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document