RESUMO
BACKGROUND: This survey aimed to explore the availability and accessibility of echocardiography during noncardiac surgery worldwide. METHODS: An internet-based 45-item survey was sent, followed by reminders from August 30, 2021, to August 20, 2022. RESULTS: 1189 responses were received from 62 countries. Nearly seventy-one percent of respondents had intraoperatively used transesophageal or transthoracic echocardiography (TEE and TTE, respectively) for monitoring or examination. The unavailability of echocardiography machines (30.3%), lack of trained personnel (30.2%), and absence of clinical indications (22.6%) were the top 3 reasons for not using intraoperative echocardiography in noncardiac surgery. About 61.5% of participants had access to at least one echocardiography machine. About 41% had access to at least 1 TEE probe, and 62.2% had access to at least 1 TTE probe. Seventy-four percent of centers had a procedure to request intraoperative echocardiography if needed for noncardiac cases. Intraoperative echocardiography service was immediately available in 58% of centers. CONCLUSIONS: Echocardiography machines and skilled echocardiographers are still unavailable at many centers worldwide. National societies should aim to train a critical mass of certified TEE/TTE anesthesiologists and provide all anesthesiologists access to perioperative TEE/TTE machines in anesthesiology departments, considering the increasing number of older and sicker surgical patients scheduled for noncardiac surgery.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is a large global deficit of anesthesia providers. In 2016, the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA) conducted a survey to count the number of anesthesia providers worldwide. Much work has taken place since then to strengthen the anesthesia health workforce. This study updates the global count of anesthesia providers. METHODS: Between 2021 and 2023, an electronic survey was sent to national professional societies of physician anesthesia providers (PAPs), nurse anesthetists, and other nonphysician anesthesia providers (NPAPs). Data included number of providers and trainees, proportion of females, and limited intensive care unit (ICU) capacity data. Descriptive statistics were calculated by country, World Bank income group, and World Health Organization (WHO) region. Provider density is reported as the number of providers per 100,000 population. RESULTS: Responses were obtained for 172 of 193 United Nations (UN) member countries. The global provider density was 8.8 (PAP 6.6 NPAP 2.3). Seventy-six countries had a PAP density <5, whereas 66 countries had a total provider density <5. PAP density increased everywhere except for high- and low-income countries and the African region. CONCLUSIONS: The overall size of the global anesthesia workforce has increased over time, although some countries have experienced a decrease. Population growth and differences in which provider types that are counted can have an important impact on provider density. More work is needed to define appropriate metrics for measuring changes in density, to describe anesthesia cadres, and to improve workforce data collection processes. Effort to scale up anesthesia provider training must urgently continue.
Assuntos
Anestesiologistas , Anestesiologia , Saúde Global , Humanos , Anestesiologistas/tendências , Anestesiologistas/provisão & distribuição , Anestesiologia/tendências , Anestesiologia/educação , Feminino , Mão de Obra em Saúde/tendências , Enfermeiros Anestesistas/tendências , Enfermeiros Anestesistas/provisão & distribuição , Masculino , Pesquisas sobre Atenção à Saúde , Recursos Humanos/tendências , Inquéritos e Questionários , Anestesia/tendências , Países em DesenvolvimentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Anaesthesiologists deliver an increasing amount of patient care and often work long hours in operating theatres and intensive care units, with frequent on-calls and insufficient rest in between. In the long term, this will negatively influence mental and physical health and well being. As fatigue becomes more prevalent, this has predictable implications for patient safety and clinical effectiveness. 1. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence, severity, causes and implications of work-related fatigue amongst specialist anaesthesiologists. DESIGN: An online survey of specialist anaesthesiologists. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was sent to anaesthesiologists in 42 European countries by electronic mail. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses from a 36-item online survey assessed work-related fatigue and its impact on anaesthesiologists in European countries. RESULTS: Work-related fatigue was experienced in 91.6% of the 1508 respondents from 32 European countries. Fatigue was caused by their working patterns, clinical and nonclinical workloads, staffing issues and excessive work hours. Over 70% reported that work-related fatigue negatively impacted on their physical and mental health, emotional well being and safe commuting. Most respondents did not feel supported by their organisation to maintain good health and well being. CONCLUSION: Work-related fatigue is a significant and widespread problem amongst anaesthesiologists. More education and increased awareness of fatigue and its adverse effects on patient safety, staff well being and physical and mental health are needed. Departments should ensure that their rotas and job plans comply with the European Working Time Directive (EWTD) and introduce a fatigue risk management system to mitigate the effects of fatigue.
Assuntos
Anestesiologistas , Fadiga , Humanos , Europa (Continente)/epidemiologia , Inquéritos e Questionários , Fadiga/diagnóstico , Fadiga/epidemiologiaRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: The use of high fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) intraoperatively for the prevention of surgical site infection (SSI) remains controversial. Promising results of early randomised controlled trials (RCT) have been replicated with varying success and subsequent meta-analysis are equivocal. Recent advancements in perioperative care, including the increased use of laparoscopic surgery and pneumoperitoneum and shifts in fluid and temperature management, can affect peripheral oxygen delivery and may explain the inconsistency in reproducibility. However, the published data provides insufficient detail on the participant level to test these hypotheses. The purpose of this individual participant data meta-analysis is to assess the described benefits and harms of intraoperative high FiO2compared with regular (0.21-0.40) FiO2 and its potential effect modifiers. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers will search medical databases and online trial registries, including MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO regional databases, for randomised and quasi-RCT comparing the effect of intraoperative high FiO2 (0.60-1.00) to regular FiO2 (0.21-0.40) on SSI within 90 days after surgery in adult patients. Secondary outcome will be all-cause mortality within the longest available follow-up. Investigators of the identified trials will be invited to collaborate. Data will be analysed with the one-step approach using the generalised linear mixed model framework and the statistical model appropriate for the type of outcome being analysed (logistic and cox regression, respectively), with a random treatment effect term to account for the clustering of patients within studies. The bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials V.2 and the certainty of evidence using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Prespecified subgroup analyses include use of mechanical ventilation, nitrous oxide, preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis, temperature (<35°C), fluid supplementation (<15 mL/kg/hour) and procedure duration (>2.5 hour). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval is not required. Investigators will deidentify individual participant data before it is shared. The results will be submitted to a peer-review journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018090261.
Assuntos
Oxigênio , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica , Adulto , Humanos , Infecção da Ferida Cirúrgica/prevenção & controle , Revisões Sistemáticas como Assunto , Metanálise como Assunto , Respiração Artificial , Ensaios Clínicos Controlados Aleatórios como AssuntoRESUMO
Patient safety is a core principle of anesthesia care worldwide. The specialty of anesthesiology has been a leader in medicine for the past half century in pursuing patient safety research and implementing standards of care and systematic improvements in processes of care. Together, these efforts have dramatically reduced patient harm associated with anesthesia. However, improved anesthesia patient safety has not been uniformly obtained worldwide. There are unique differences in patient safety outcomes between countries and regions in the world. These differences are often related to factors such as availability, support, and use of health care resources, trained personnel, patient safety outcome data collection efforts, standards of care, and cultures of safety and teamwork in health care facilities. This article provides insights from national anesthesia society leaders from 13 countries around the world. The countries they represent are diverse geographically and in health care resources. The authors share their countries' current and future initiatives in anesthesia patient safety. Ten major patient safety issues are common to these countries, with several of these focused on the importance of extending initiatives into the full perioperative as well as intraoperative environments. These issues may be used by anesthesia leaders around the globe to direct collaborative efforts to improve the safety of patients undergoing surgery and anesthesia in the coming decade.
Assuntos
Anestesia , Anestesiologia , Anestesia/efeitos adversos , Humanos , Segurança do PacienteRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Indicators to evaluate progress towards timely access to safe surgical, anaesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) care were proposed in 2015 by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery. These aimed to capture access to surgery, surgical workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality rate, and catastrophic and impoverishing financial consequences of surgery. Despite being rapidly taken up by practitioners, data points from which to derive the indicators were not defined, limiting comparability across time or settings. We convened global experts to evaluate and explicitly define-for the first time-the indicators to improve comparability and support achievement of 2030 goals to improve access to safe affordable surgical and anaesthesia care globally. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The Utstein process for developing and reporting guidelines through a consensus building process was followed. In-person discussions at a 2-day meeting were followed by an iterative process conducted by email and virtual group meetings until consensus was reached. The meeting was held between June 16 to 18, 2019; discussions continued until August 2020. Participants consisted of experts in surgery, anaesthesia, and obstetric care, data science, and health indicators from high-, middle-, and low-income countries. Considering each of the 6 indicators in turn, we refined overarching descriptions and agreed upon data points needed for construction of each indicator at current time (basic data points), and as each evolves over 2 to 5 (intermediate) and >5 year (full) time frames. We removed one of the original 6 indicators (one of 2 financial risk protection indicators was eliminated) and refined descriptions and defined data points required to construct the 5 remaining indicators: geospatial access, workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality, and catastrophic expenditure. A strength of the process was the number of people from global institutes and multilateral agencies involved in the collection and reporting of global health metrics; a limitation was the limited number of participants from low- or middle-income countries-who only made up 21% of the total attendees. CONCLUSIONS: To track global progress towards timely access to quality SAO care, these indicators-at the basic level-should be implemented universally as soon as possible. Intermediate and full indicator sets should be achieved by all countries over time. Meanwhile, these evolutions can assist in the short term in developing national surgical plans and collecting more detailed data for research studies.
Assuntos
Anestesia/normas , Saúde Global/normas , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Obstétricos/normas , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde/estatística & dados numéricos , ConsensoRESUMO
Sudden out-of-hospital cardiac arrest is the third leading cause of death in industrialized nations. Many of these lives could be saved if bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation rates were better. "All citizens of the world can save a life-CHECK-CALL-COMPRESS." With these words, the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation launched the 2019 global "World Restart a Heart" initiative to increase public awareness and improve the rates of bystander cardiopulmonary resuscitation and overall survival for millions of victims of cardiac arrest globally. All participating organizations were asked to train and to report the numbers of people trained and reached. Overall, social media impact and awareness reached up to 206 million people, and >5.4 million people were trained in cardiopulmonary resuscitation worldwide in 2019. Tool kits and information packs were circulated to 194 countries worldwide. Our simple and unified global message, "CHECK-CALL-COMPRESS," will save hundreds of thousands of lives worldwide and will further enable many policy makers around the world to take immediate and sustainable action in this most important healthcare issue and initiative.
Assuntos
Reanimação Cardiopulmonar/educação , Parada Cardíaca Extra-Hospitalar/terapia , Saúde Global , HumanosAssuntos
Infecções por Coronavirus , Países em Desenvolvimento , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Humanos , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
: Patient safety is an activity to mitigate preventable patient harm that may occur during the delivery of medical care. The European Board of Anaesthesiology (EBA)/European Union of Medical Specialists had previously published safety recommendations on minimal monitoring and postanaesthesia care, but with the growing public and professional interest it was decided to produce a much more encompassing document. The EBA and the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) published a consensus on what needs to be done/achieved for improvement of peri-operative patient safety. During the Euroanaesthesia meeting in Helsinki/Finland in 2010, this vision was presented to anaesthesiologists, patients, industry and others involved in health care as the 'Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology'. In May/June 2020, ESA and EBA are celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology; a good opportunity to look back and forward evaluating what was achieved in the recent 10 years, and what needs to be done in the upcoming years. The Patient Safety and Quality Committee (PSQC) of ESA invited experts in their fields to contribute, and these experts addressed their topic in different ways; there are classical, narrative reviews, more systematic reviews, political statements, personal opinions and also original data presentation. With this publication we hope to further stimulate implementation of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology, as well as initiating relevant research in the future.
Assuntos
Analgesia/normas , Anestesia/normas , Anestesiologia/normas , Competência Clínica/normas , Erros Médicos/prevenção & controle , Segurança do Paciente/normas , Assistência Perioperatória/estatística & dados numéricos , Qualidade da Assistência à Saúde/normas , Analgesia/efeitos adversos , Anestesia/efeitos adversos , Prova Pericial , Declaração de Helsinki , Humanos , Período Perioperatório , Guias de Prática Clínica como AssuntoAssuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Anestesia/organização & administração , Infecções por Coronavirus/transmissão , Infecção Hospitalar/prevenção & controle , Transmissão de Doença Infecciosa do Paciente para o Profissional/prevenção & controle , Unidade Hospitalar de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia/organização & administração , Pneumonia Viral/transmissão , Centro Cirúrgico Hospitalar/organização & administração , África Subsaariana/epidemiologia , Betacoronavirus , COVID-19 , Infecções por Coronavirus/terapia , Humanos , Corpo Clínico Hospitalar , Pandemias , Equipamento de Proteção Individual/provisão & distribuição , Pneumonia Viral/terapia , SARS-CoV-2RESUMO
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is spreading rapidly around the world with devastating consequences on patients, health care workers, health systems, and economies. As it reaches low- and middle-income countries, its effects could be even more dire, because it will be difficult for them to respond aggressively to the pandemic. There is a great shortage of all health care providers, who will be at risk due to a lack of personal protection equipment. Social distancing will be almost impossible. The necessary resources to treat patients will be in short supply. The end result could be a catastrophic loss of life. A global effort will be required to support faltering economies and health care systems.