A randomised controlled trial comparing needle movements during combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia with and without ultrasound assistance.

Ultrasound assistance for neuraxial techniques may improve technical performance; however, it is unclear which populations benefit most. Our study aimed to investigate the efficacy of neuraxial ultrasound in women having caesarean section with combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia, and to identify factors associated with improved technical performance. Two-hundred and eighteen women were randomly allocated to ultrasound-assisted or control groups. All the women had a pre-procedure ultrasound, but only women in the ultrasound group had this information conveyed to the anaesthetist. Primary outcomes were first-pass success (a single needle insertion with no redirections) and procedure difficulty. Secondary outcomes were block quality, patient experience and complications. Exploratory sub-group analysis and regression analysis were used to identify factors associated with success. Data from 215 women were analysed. First-pass success was achieved in 67 (63.8%) and 42 (38.2%) women in the ultrasound and control groups, respectively (adjusted p = 0.001). Combined spinal-epidural anaesthesia was 'difficult' in 19 (18.1%) and 33 (30.0%) women in the ultrasound and control groups, respectively (adjusted p = 0.09). Secondary outcomes did not differ significantly. Anaesthetists misidentified the intervertebral level by two or more spaces in 23 (10.7%) women. Sub-group analysis demonstrated a benefit for ultrasound in women with easily palpable spinous processes (adjusted p = 0.027). Regression analysis identified use of ultrasound and easily palpable spinous processes to be associated with first-pass success.

Introduction of a mandatory pre-block safety checklist into a regional anaesthesia block room service: a quality improvement project.

Wrong-side block is an uncommon yet potentially preventable complication of regional anaesthesia. One strategy for reducing the incidence of wrong-side block is to introduce an additional check into the pre-block workflow in the form of a block 'time out' or 'stop before you block'. In the aftermath of a wrong-side block incident at our institution, the mandatory use of a pre-block safety checklist was successfully introduced into the workflow of the block room. Compliance with the checklist rose from 31% in the six-month pre-intervention phase to over 90% in the six-month post-intervention phase. This was achieved without any negative effect on block efficacy, theatre efficiency, complication rates or patient satisfaction. The high rate of checklist utilisation was associated with an increased rate of ultrasound video documentation. This suggests that there may be collateral benefit to using a pre-block safety checklist in addition to merely reducing the risk of wrong-side block.

The effectiveness of regional anaesthesia before and after the introduction of a dedicated regional anaesthesia service incorporating a block room.

Dedicated regional anaesthesia services incorporating block rooms and/or block teams may facilitate theatre efficiency and improve training in regional anaesthesia. Currently, it is unknown if a dedicated regional anaesthesia service improves the effectiveness of regional anaesthesia. In November 2013, the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital established a dedicated regional anaesthesia service comprising a block team and a block room. Pre-intervention (conventional model of care) registry data was retrospectively compared with post-intervention (dedicated regional anaesthesia service) audit data, with regard to pain and opioid requirement in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU). The primary outcome was inadequate analgesia, defined as a numerical rating scale (NRS; 0, no pain; 10, worst pain imaginable) for pain >5 in the PACU. Pre- and post-intervention, 43.7% and 27.7% of patients respectively reported a NRS >5 (P <0.001). A difference in the type of blocks and surgery performed may have accounted for the improved outcome seen post-intervention. After adjustment for American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, block type and surgery type, the odds ratio of having inadequate analgesia (NRS >5) was 0.54 (95% confidence interval 0.39 to 0.76) for post-intervention compared to pre-intervention. Secondary outcomes examined pre- and post-intervention were the absence of pain (39.3% and 55.1% of patients, respectively, P <0.001), systemic opioid analgesia requirement (48.6% and 30.5% of patients respectively, P <0.001) and median maximum NRS (4 [interquartile range (IQR) 0 to 8] and 0 [IQR 0 to 6] respectively, P <0.001). A dedicated regional anaesthesia service was associated with improved effectiveness of regional anaesthesia.