scholarly journals A Clinical Audit of An Office-Based Anaesthesia Service for Dental Procedures in Victoria

2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 404-413 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Silvers ◽  
A. Licina ◽  
L. Jolevska
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
General Anaesthesia ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Day Surgery ◽  
Adverse Event Rate ◽  
Policy Documents ◽  
Patient Demographics ◽  
Physical Status Classification ◽  
Dental Procedures ◽  
American Society

There is an increasing number of specialties performing office-based procedures, with many different providers practising in this field. Office Based Anaesthesia Solutions is a private enterprise designed to be a high-quality general anaesthesia and sedation service delivering care across 18 dental practices in Victoria. We undertook a criterion-based audit of our practice standards and outcomes. Following ethics approval, we retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients managed by our service between March 2014 and July 2017. We collected demographic data, information about anaesthesia technique, and surgical features. We assessed our findings against the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) day surgery policy documents. During the specified period, we provided anaesthesia or sedation for 1,323 patients. Their ages ranged from two to 93 years (mean [standard deviation] 33.3 [18.6] years). Ninety-three percent of patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification 1 or 2. Patient demographics were in line with ANZCA day surgical policy documents. Total intravenous anaesthesia was used in 1,054 of the 1,096 documented general anaesthesia cases. There were three unplanned hospital transfers (annual incidence 0.07%). As this was the first Australian criteria-based audit of office-based anaesthesia (OBA) for dental procedures, we cannot compare our findings directly to previous studies. However, we feel that our patient demographics fell within acceptable ANZCA day procedure standards and our adverse event rate was both very low and similar to other published international adverse event rates. Our audit indicates that with careful screening processes, patient selection and medical governance, OBA is a viable model of care for patients undergoing dental procedures.

Comparing Demographic Characteristics and Adverse Event Rates at Two Dermatologic Surgery Practices

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 337-340 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenna L. O'Neill ◽  
Brandon Shutty ◽  
Yun Sun Lee ◽  
James A. Solomon ◽  
Nikita Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Geographic Location ◽  
Common Adverse Event ◽  
Adverse Event Rate ◽  
Dermatologic Surgery ◽  
Patient Demographics ◽  
Logistic Regression Procedure ◽  
Event Rates ◽  
Procedure Type

Background: Patient demographics and operative techniques may contribute to adverse events after surgeries. Objective: To identify differences in adverse event rates between different dermatologic surgery centers and potential contributing features affecting these rates. Methods: Data regarding demographics, procedure type, and adverse events were collected at two dermatologic surgery centers. Results: The most common adverse event at both sites was infection: 2.1% at site 1 versus 0.5% at site 2 ( p < .001). Using multivariate logistic regression, procedure type (Mohs surgery), geographic location (being at site 1), older age, and anatomic location of surgery were associated with a higher risk of infection. Conclusion: Adverse event rate appears to correlate with patient demographics, procedure type, and setting of surgery more than use of prophylactic antibiotics. Identification of differences in adverse event rates and potential contributing variables at different practices may allow for identification of opportunities to prevent adverse events.

scholarly journals PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED COMPARITIVE STUDY ON USAGE OF EPISURE AUTODETECT SYRINGE VERSUS GLASS SYRINGE IN LOWER THORACIC EPIDURALANALGESIA

2020 ◽  
pp. 24-25
Author(s):  
N.Rajanalini M.D ◽  
Fathima KSMB
Keyword(s):  
Epidural Space ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Data Depth ◽  
Thoracic Epidural ◽  
Patient Demographics ◽  
Glass Syringe ◽  
Group I ◽  
Loss Of Resistance ◽  
Patient Demographic Data ◽  
American Society

Episure & AutoDetect syringe (EAS), a spring-loaded syringe, is a new loss-of-resistance syringe used to identify epidural space. It has an advantage of subjective and objective confirmation in identifying epidural space over glass syringe (GS) for beginners. We compared the performance of EAS with that of GS for identifying epidural space in lower thoracic epidurals. Methods: A total of 40 American Society of Anesthesiolgists I-II patients aged 18-60 years requiring lower thoracic epidural analgesia for surgery were randomised into Group I (EAS): Epidural identified using EAS and Group II (GS) epidural identified with GS. Patient demographic data, depth to epidural space (cm) was noted Results: There were no differences in patient demographics or depth to the epidural space between the two groups. When epidural was identified in fewer attempts, the time needed to identify epidural space was quicker with EAS . Conclusion: Using EAS allowed reliable and quick identification of the epidural space in lower thoracic epidural technique as compared to use of glass syringe.

scholarly journals Outcomes of Non-anesthesiologist-Administered Propofol in Pediatric Gastroenterology Procedures

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frances C. Lee ◽  
Karen Queliza ◽  
Bruno P. Chumpitazi ◽  
Amber P. Rogers ◽  
Catherine Seipel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
General Anesthesia ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Event Rate ◽  
Adverse Event Rate ◽  
Gastrointestinal Adverse Event ◽  
Acceptable Safety Profile ◽  
Physical Classification ◽  
American Society

Background and Aims: Non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol (NAAP) has been found to have an acceptable safety profile in adult endoscopy, but its use remains controversial and pediatric data is limited. Our aim was to examine the safety and efficacy of NAAP provided by pediatric hospitalists in pediatric endoscopy.Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 929 esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD), colonoscopy, and combined EGD/colonoscopy cases in children aged 5–20 years between April 2015 and December 2016 at a large children's hospital. We analyzed the data for adverse events in relation to demographics and anthropometrics, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical classification score, presence of a trainee, comorbid conditions, and procedure time.Results: A total of 929 cases were included of which 496 (53%) were completed with NAAP. Seventeen (3.4%) of NAAP cases had an adverse event including the following: 12 cases of hypoxia, 2 cardiac, and 3 gastrointestinal adverse events. General anesthesia cases had 62 (14.3%) adverse events including the following: 54 cases of hypoxia, 1 cardiac, 7 gastrointestinal, and 1 urologic adverse event. No adverse events in either group required major resuscitation. NAAP vs. general anesthesia had a lower overall adverse event rate (3.4 vs. 14.3%, p &lt; 0.0004) and respiratory adverse event rate (2.4% vs. 12.5%, p &lt; 0.0004). Overall, cardiac and gastrointestinal adverse event rates between the two groups were comparable. When accounting for all captured factors via logistic regression, both younger age (P &lt; 0.001) and general anesthesia (P &lt; 0.0001) remained risk factors for an adverse event.Conclusion: The overall adverse event rate of NAAP was low (3.4%) with none requiring major resuscitation or hospitalization. This is comparable to studies of NAAP in adult endoscopy and suggests that NAAP provided by pediatric hospitalists has an acceptable safety profile.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Pediatric Procedural Sedation Outside the Operating Room

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thitima Sirimontakan ◽  
Ninuma Artprom ◽  
Nattachai Anantasit
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Operating Room ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Procedural Sedation ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Physical Status Classification ◽  
Sedation And Analgesia ◽  
American Society ◽  
American Society Of Anesthesiologists

Background: The volume of pediatric Procedural Sedation and Analgesia (PSA) outside the operating room has been increasing. This high clinical demand leads non-anesthesiologists, especially pediatric intensivists, pediatricians, and emergency physicians, to take a role in performing procedural sedation. Our department has established the PSA service by pediatric intensivists since 2015. Objectives: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of PSA outside the operating room conducted by pediatric intensivists and identify risk factors for severe adverse events. Methods: This was a retrospective descriptive study conducted from January 2015 to July 2019. Children aged less than 20 years who underwent procedural sedation were included. We collected demographic data, sedative and analgesic medications, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status Classification, indications for sedation, the success of procedural sedation, and any adverse events. Results: Altogether, 395 patients with 561 procedural sedation cases were included. The median age was 55 months (range: 15 to 119 months), and 58.5% (231/395) were male. The rate of successful procedures under PSA was 99.3%. Serious Adverse Events (SAE) occurred in 2.7%. Patients who received more than three sedative medications had higher SAE than patients who received fewer medications (adjusted for age, location of sedation, type of procedure, and ASA classification) (odds ratio: 8.043; 95% CI: 2.472 - 26.173, P = 0.001). Conclusions: Our data suggest that children who undergo procedural sedation outside the operating room conducted by pediatric intensivists are safe and effectively treated. Receiving more than three sedative medications is the independent risk factor associated with serious adverse events.

scholarly journals Office-Based Anesthesia: Safety and Outcomes in Pediatric Dental Patients

2017 ◽  
Vol 64 (3) ◽  
pp. 144-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison L. Spera ◽  
Mark A. Saxen ◽  
Juan F. Yepes ◽  
James E. Jones ◽  
Brian J. Sanders
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Event ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Ambulatory Anesthesia ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Number Of Children ◽  
Dental Patients ◽  
Patient Demographics ◽  
Dental Procedures

The number of children with caries requiring general anesthesia to achieve comprehensive dental care and the demand for dentist anesthesiologists to provide ambulatory anesthesia for these patients is increasing. No current published studies examine the safety and outcomes of ambulatory anesthesia performed by dentist anesthesiologists for dental procedures in pediatric patients, and there is no national requirement for reporting outcomes of these procedures. In 2010, the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry was developed. This Web-based database allows providers of ambulatory anesthesia to track patient demographics and various outcomes of procedures. Our study is a secondary analysis of data collected in the registry over a 4-year period, 2010–2014. Of the 7041 cases reviewed, no cases resulted in serious complications, including death, anaphylaxis, aspiration, cardiovascular adverse events, or neurologic adverse events. Of the 7041 cases reviewed, 196 (3.0%) resulted in a predischarge or postdischarge adverse event. The predischarge adverse event occurring with the highest frequency was laryngospasm, occurring in 35 cases (0.50%). The postdischarge adverse event occurring with the highest frequency was nausea, reported by 99 patients (5.0%). This study provides strong clinical outcomes data to support the safety of office-based anesthesia as performed by dentist anesthesiologists in the treatment of pediatric dental patients.

scholarly journals Do anesthesia emergence times reflect resident training progression, educational competency, and operating room efficiency?

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Fitzgerald Miles ◽  
Christopher Ryan Hoffman ◽  
Janeway Granche ◽  
Michael Stuart Green
Keyword(s):  
Operating Room ◽  
Day Surgery ◽  
Resident Training ◽  
Emergence Time ◽  
Retrospective Case ◽  
Training Time ◽  
Patient Status ◽  
Physical Status Classification ◽  
American Society ◽  
One Year

Abstract Background: Anesthesia residents are often subjectively and objectively deemed competent by their impact of cost-efficacy and perioperative metrics. Assessing knowledge acquisition and procedural skill is difficult to measure equitably. Inspecting tangible metrics of perioperative efficiency may or may not provide a source for reliable evaluation. Methods: Retrospective case-log database review yielded 3072 surgical cases involving residents over five years. Primary variable investigated was the time from surgery completion to exit from operating room. Other variables recorded included day of week, attending anesthesiologist name, attending surgeon name, patient age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification (ASA PS), and in-patient versus day surgery status. Results: After controlling for procedure duration time, in-patient status, ASA class, surgeon, and attending anesthesiologist, resident training time became highly significant (p < 0.001). In the fully adjusted model, one year of resident training was associated with a reduction in emergence time by 28 seconds (95% CL = (12, 44)). A one-hour increase in procedure time was associated with an increase in emergence time of 34 seconds (95% CL = (17, 50)). Conclusions: Although a statistically significant correlation was demonstrated, the clinical significance is likely low given the relatively small amount of actual time saved. We question the value of utilizing perceived or measured perioperative metrics for evaluating anesthesia resident competency.

A Comparison of Colectomy Outcomes Utilizing Open, Laparoscopic, and Robotic Techniques

2020 ◽  
pp. 000313482097338
Author(s):  
Elizabeth McCarthy ◽  
Benjamin L. Gough ◽  
Michael S. Johns ◽  
Alexandra Hanlon ◽  
Sachin Vaid ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Recovery ◽  
Logistic Regression Models ◽  
Community Institution ◽  
Physical Status Classification ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Comparative Review ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
American Society ◽  
The Individual ◽  
American Society Of Anesthesiologists

Introduction Robotic colectomy could reduce morbidity and postoperative recovery over laparoscopic and open procedures. This comparative review evaluates colectomy outcomes based on surgical approach at a single community institution. Methods A retrospective review of all patients who underwent colectomy by a fellowship-trained colon and rectal surgeon at a single institution from 2015 through 2019 was performed, and a cohort developed for each approach (open, laparoscopic, and robotic). 30-day outcomes were evaluated. For dichotomous outcomes, univariate logistic regression models were used to quantify the individual effect of each predictor of interest on the odds of each outcome. Continuous outcomes received a similar approach; however, linear and Poisson regression modeling were used, as appropriate. Results 115 patients were evaluated: 14% (n = 16) open, 44% (n = 51) laparoscopic, and 42% (n = 48) robotic. Among the cohorts, there was no statistically significant difference in operative time, rate of reoperation, readmission, or major complications. Robotic colectomies resulted in the shortest length of stay (LOS) (Kruskal-Wallis P < .0001) and decreased estimated blood loss (EBL) (Kruskal-Wallis P = .0012). Median age was 63 years (interquartile range [IQR] 53-72). 54% (n = 62) were female. Median American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification was 3 (IQR 2-3). Median body mass index was 28.67 (IQR 25.03-33.47). A malignant diagnosis was noted on final pathology in 44% (n = 51). Conclusion Among the 3 approaches, there was no statistically significant difference in 30-day morbidity or mortality. There was a statistically significant decreased LOS and EBL for robotic colectomies.

scholarly journals Comparison of Train of Four Measurements with Kinemyography NMT DATEX and Accelerography TOFscan

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
Cyrus Motamed ◽  
Migena Demiri ◽  
Nora Colegrave
Keyword(s):  
Neuromuscular Blockade ◽  
Lower Limit ◽  
Elective Surgery ◽  
Orotracheal Intubation ◽  
Neuromuscular Blocking ◽  
Physical Status Classification ◽  
Train Of Four ◽  
Surgery First ◽  
American Society ◽  
American Society Of Anesthesiologists

Introduction: This study was designed to compare the Datex neuromuscular transmission (NMT) kinemyography (NMTK) device with the TOFscan (TS) accelerometer during the onset and recovery of neuromuscular blockade. Patients and methods: This prospective study included adult patients who were scheduled to undergo elective surgery with general anesthesia and orotracheal intubation. The TS accelerometer was randomly placed at the adductor pollicis on one hand, and the NMTK was placed on the opposite arm. Anesthesia was initiated with remifentanil target-controlled infusion (TCI) and 2.0–3.0 mg/kg of propofol. Thereafter, 0.5 mg/kg of atracurium or 0.6 mg/kg of rocuronium was injected. If needed, additional neuromuscular blocking agents were administered to facilitate surgery. First, we recorded the train of four (TOF) response at the onset of neuromuscular blockade to reach a TOF count of 0. Second, we recorded the TOF response at the recovery of neuromuscular blockade to obtain a T4/T1 90% by both TS and NMTK. Results: There were 32 patients, aged 38–83 years, with the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Physical Status Classification I–III included and analyzed. Surgery was abdominal, gynecologic, or head and neck. The Bland and Altman analysis for obtaining zero responses during the onset showed a bias (mean) of 2.7 s (delay) of TS in comparison to NMTK, with an upper/lower limit of agreement of [104; −109 s] and a bias of 36 s of TS in comparison to NMTK, with an upper/lower limit of agreement of [−21.8, −23.1 min] during recovery (T4/T1 > 90%). Conclusions: Under the conditions of the present study, the two devices are not interchangeable. Clinical decisions for deep neuromuscular blockade should be made cautiously, as both devices appear less accurate with significant variability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document