Burnout from Gender Inequity in a Pandemic.

Women represent approximately one-third of all anesthesiologists in the United States. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, research regarding gender bias in anesthesiology defined the scope of the problem. Unfortunately, the pandemic exposed and expanded the imbalances associated with gender, placing women anesthesiologists as both primary caregivers in the home and on the frontlines of health care. These systemic inequities exacerbated burnout in women anesthesiologists. Several initiatives that can improve well-being and the work culture for all anesthesiologists, including women, will also be discussed.

Physician Coaching.

The practice of anesthesiology requires both clinical skills and the ability to navigate complex social situations. Leadership skills such as emotional intelligence, adaptability, conflict management, and negotiation are crucial for success but infrequently taught. Coaching is a thought-provoking process that enhances self-awareness and inspires the maximization of personal and professional potential. It has been used in the business world for personal and professional development for decades, and evidence now exists that coaching also provides benefits for physicians in both professional development and well-being.

Gender Differences in Compensation in Anesthesiology in the United States: Results of a National Survey of Anesthesiologists.

BACKGROUND: A gender-based compensation gap among physicians is well documented. Even after adjusting for age, experience, work hours, productivity, and academic rank, the gender gap remained and widened over the course of a physician's career. This study aimed to examine if a significant gender pay gap still existed for anesthesiologists in the United States. METHODS: In 2018, we surveyed 28,812 physician members of the American Society of Anesthesiologists to assess the association of compensation with gender and to identify possible causes of wage disparities. Gender was the primary variable examined in the model, and compensation by gender was the primary outcome. Compensation was defined as the amount reported as direct compensation on a W-2, 1099, or K-1, plus all voluntary salary reductions (eg, 401[k], health insurance). The survey directed respondents to include salary, bonuses, incentive payments, research stipends, honoraria, and distribution of profits to employees. Respondents had the option of providing a point estimate of their compensation or selecting a range in $50,000 increments. Potential confounding variables that could affect compensation were identified based on a scoping literature review and the consensus expertise of the authors. We fitted a generalized ordinal logistic regression with 7 ranges of compensation. For the sensitivity analyses, we used linear regressions of log-transformed compensation based on respondent point estimates and imputed values. RESULTS: The final analytic sample consisted of 2081 observations (response rate, 7.2%). This sample represented a higher percentage of women and younger physicians compared to the demographic makeup of anesthesiologists in the United States. The adjusted odds ratio associated with gender equal to woman was an estimated 0.44 (95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.53), indicating that for a given compensation range, women had a 56% lower odds than men of being in a higher compensation range. Sensitivity analyses found the relative percentage difference in compensation for women compared to men ranged from -8.3 to -8.9. In the sensitivity analysis based on the subset of respondents (n = 1036) who provided a point estimate of compensation, the relative percentage difference (-8.3%; 95% confidence interval, -4.7 to -11.7) reflected a $32,617 lower compensation for women than men, holding other covariates at their means. CONCLUSIONS: Compensation for anesthesiologists showed a significant pay gap that was associated with gender even after adjusting for potential confounding factors, including age, hours worked, geographic practice region, practice type, position, and job selection criteria.

Comparison of a lower-lipid propofol emulsion with the standard emulsion for sedation during monitored anesthesia care.

BACKGROUND: The currently used emulsion formulations of 1% propofol contain 10% soybean oil. However, a new emulsion of 1% propofol (Ampofol) containing 50% less lipid has recently become available for clinical investigation. This study was designed to compare the pharmacodynamic properties of Ampofol with those of a standard formulation (Diprivan) when administered for intraoperative sedation. METHODS: Sixty healthy outpatients undergoing minor operations with local anesthesia were randomly assigned to receive either Ampofol (n = 31) or Diprivan (n = 29) for intravenous sedation. The sedation was initiated with an intravenous loading dose of propofol, 0.75 mg/kg, followed by an initial infusion rate of 50 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) to achieve an Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score of 3. The targeted level of sedation was maintained with a variable-rate propofol infusion during the operation. The onset times to achieving a sedation score of 3, the severity of pain on injection of the loading dose, intraoperative hemodynamic variables, and electroencephalographic Bispectral Index values were recorded. In addition, recovery times, postoperative pain and nausea, and patient satisfaction with the sedative medication were assessed. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between Ampofol and Diprivan with respect to onset times, dosage requirements, Bispectral Index values, hemodynamic variables, recovery times, or patient satisfaction scores. The incidence of moderate pain on injection was higher in the Ampofol group (26%vs. 7% with Diprivan; P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Ampofol was equipotent to Diprivan with respect to its sedative properties during monitored anesthesia care. Although both groups received pretreatment with intravenous lidocaine, Ampofol was associated with more pain on injection.

Effect of auditory evoked potential index monitoring on anesthetic drug requirements and recovery profile after laparoscopic surgery: a clinical utility study.

BACKGROUND: The auditory evoked potential (AEP) monitor provides an electroencephalogram-derived index (AAI) that has been reported to correlate with the central nervous system depressant effects of anesthetic drugs. This clinical utility study was designed to test the hypothesis that AAI-guided administration of the maintenance anesthetics and analgesics would improve their titration and thereby provide a faster recovery from general anesthesia. METHODS: Seventy consenting patients undergoing elective general surgery procedures were randomly assigned to either a control (standard clinical practice) or AEP-monitored group. Although the AEP monitor was connected to all patients, the information from the monitor was only made available to the anesthesiologists assigned to patients in the AEP-monitored group. In the AEP-monitored group, the inspired desflurane concentration was titrated to maintain an AAI value of 15-20. In the control group, the inspired desflurane concentration was varied based on standard clinical signs. The AAI values and hemodynamic variables, as well as end-tidal desflurane concentrations, were recorded at 3- to 5-min intervals. The recovery times to achieve a White fast-track score greater than 12 and an Aldrete score of 10, as well as the actual duration of the PACU stay, were evaluated at 5- to 10-min intervals. Patient satisfaction with recovery from anesthesia was assessed using a 100-point verbal rating scale at 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: The average intraoperative AAI value in the AEP-monitored group was significantly higher than in the control group (16 +/- 5 vs. 11 +/- 8, P < 0.05). Use of the AEP monitor reduced the desflurane requirement by 26% compared to the control group (P < 0.01). In addition, the AEP-monitored group received less intraoperative fentanyl (270 +/- 120 vs. 390 +/- 203 microg, P < 0.05) and more rapidly achieved fast-track eligibility (29 +/- 19 vs. 56 +/- 41 min, P < 0.05). The time required to achieve an Aldrete score of 10 (60 +/- 31 vs. 98 +/- 55 min) and the duration of stay in the recovery room (78 +/- 32 vs. 106 +/- 54 min) were also significantly reduced in the AEP-monitored (vs. control) group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Use of AEP monitoring as an adjunct to standard clinical monitors improved titration of anesthetic drugs, thereby facilitating the early recovery process after laparoscopic surgery.

The effect of remifentanil on seizure duration and acute hemodynamic responses to electroconvulsive therapy.

UNLABELLED: We designed this prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study to evaluate the effect of different doses of remifentanil on the acute hemodynamic response and duration of seizure activity after a standardized electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) stimulus. Twenty consenting patients with major depressive disorders receiving maintenance ECT participated in this study. Eighty ECT treatments were evaluated. All patients were premedicated with glycopyrrolate 0.2 mg IV, unconsciousness was induced with methohexital 1 mg/kg IV, and muscle paralysis was produced with succinylcholine 1.2 mg/kg IV. Subsequently, patients received 1 of 3 different doses of remifentanil 25, 50, and 100 microg or saline (control) in a random sequence immediately after methohexital at 4 consecutive ECT treatments. Labetalol, in 5-mg IV boluses, was used as a rescue antihypertensive medication. A fixed suprathreshold electrical stimulus was administered to elicit a seizure, and the times from the stimulus to the cessation of the motor and electroencephalographic (EEG) seizure activity were noted. Pre- and post-ECT blood pressure values were significantly decreased in the 100- microg remifentanil group compared with the control group. The durations of motor (38 +/- 9 s to 43 +/- 15 s) and EEG (55 +/- 29 s to 60 +/- 21 s) seizure activity were not significantly different among the four groups. Similarly, recovery times to eye opening, obeying commands, and discharge from the recovery room did not differ among the four study groups. The requirement for labetalol after ECT was nonsignificantly decreased in the remifentanil groups. In conclusion, remifentanil 100 microg IV attenuated the acute hemodynamic response to ECT. Furthermore, remifentanil had no adverse effect on the duration of ECT-induced seizure activity. Finally, adjunctive use of remifentanil did not prolong recovery times or increase post-ECT side effects. IMPLICATIONS: Remifentanil (100 microg IV) attenuated the acute hemodynamic response after electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) without adversely affecting the length of the ECT-induced seizure activity or prolonging recovery times.