Perioperative and anaesthetic considerations of marijuana use.

The psychoactive substance cannabis is the most-commonly used drug around the world, and its use is becoming more prevalent globally. Additionally, it is becoming available in an increasing variety of forms. As such, it is imperative that perioperative practitioners have an understanding of the drug, its effects, and its implications in perioperative care. There is currently a lack of a standardised approach to a patient who uses cannabis, and prospective studies prove difficult given the current legal status of cannabis. This literature review seeks to provide information regarding cannabis and its use. Specifically, we explore the systemic effects of marijuana as well as perioperative and anaesthetic implications so that safer, more effective care may be administered.

Why We Need a Single Definition of Disruptive Behavior.

Disruptive behavior is known to produce a wide range of negative effects in healthcare, such as impacting patient safety, lowering employee morale, and decreasing employee retention. Healthcare organizations have worked towards eliminating disruptive behavior; however, despite countless interventions, the issue continues to be a problem today. Why then does the issue of disruptive behavior persist? We argue that one reason is the multiple ways disruptive behavior can be described, henceforth defined as the "plurality of terms", which can make it difficult to collect relevant data by doing a simple literature search. Hence, we believe having a single definition for "disruptive behavior" will improve the meta-analysis on disruptive behavior research.

A Novel Process Audit for Standardized Perioperative Handoff Protocols.

A perioperative handoff protocol provides a standardized delivery of communication during a handoff that occurs from the operating room to the postanestheisa care unit or ICU. The protocol's success is dependent, in part, on its continued proper use over time. A novel process audit was developed to help ensure that a perioperative handoff protocol is used accurately and appropriately over time. The Audit Observation Form is used for the Audit Phase of the process audit, while the Audit Averages Form is used for the Data Analysis Phase. Employing minimal resources and using quantitative methods, the process audit provides the necessary means to evaluate the proper execution of any perioperative handoff protocol.

The perioperative handoff protocol: evaluating impacts on handoff defects and provider satisfaction in adult perianesthesia care units.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a new perioperative handoff protocol in the adult perianesthesia care units (PACUs). DESIGN: Prospective, unblinded cross-sectional study. SETTING: Perianesthesia care unit in a tertiary care facility serving 55,000 patients annually. PATIENTS: One hundred three surgery patients. INTERVENTIONS: During a 4-week preintervention phase, 53 perioperative handoffs were observed, and data were collected daily by a trained observer. Educational sessions were conducted to train perioperative practitioners on the new protocol. Two weeks after implementation, 50 consecutive handoffs were observed, and practitioners were surveyed with the same methodology as in the preintervention phase. MEASUREMENTS: Type of information shared, type and duration of procedure, total duration of handoff, number and type of providers at the bedside, number of report interruptions, environmental distractions, and any other disruptive events. Observers also tracked technical/equipment problems to include malfunctioning or compromised operation of medical equipment, such as the cardiac monitor, transducer, oxygen tank, and pulse oximeter. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 103 handoffs were observed (53 preintervention and 50 postintervention). The mean number of defects per handoff decreased from 9.92 to 3.68 (P < .01). The mean number of missed information items from the surgery report decreased from 7.57 to 1.2 items per handoff and from 2.02 to 0.94 (P < .01) for the anesthesia report. Technical defects reported by unit nurses decreased from 0.34 to 0.10 (P = .04). Verbal reports delivered by surgeons increased from 21.2% to 83.3%. Although the mean duration of handoffs increased by 2 minutes (P = .01), the average time from patient arrival at PACU to handoff start was reduced by 1.5 minutes (P = .01). Satisfaction with the handoff improved significantly among PACU nurses. CONCLUSIONS: The perioperative handoff protocol implementation was associated with improved information sharing and reduced handoff defects.

Mechanical airway obstruction due to dislodged spinal hardware.

A difficult airway caused by mechanical obstruction from dislodged spinal hardware in a patient undergoing revision surgery for a cervical chordoma is presented. Due to the logical, sequential multidisciplinary airway and patient management by the anesthesiology, neurosurgery, and otolaryngology teams working together in an environment of clear communication, a potential life-threatening crisis was averted with successful outcome for the patient.

Implementing a perioperative handoff tool to improve postprocedural patient transfers.

Handoffs in the perioperative setting--the period during which the patient leaves the operating room (OR) and arrives at the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) or intensive care unit (ICU)--have received little attention. A perioperative handoff tool consisting of an OR-to-ICU/PACU protocol and checklists incorporates a defined process, a specified team structure, a procedure for technology transfer, and clearly defined information elements to share. The tool could be applied to any periprocedural setting in which a patient is physically transferred from the procedural location (with the associated procedural team) to a postprocedural care unit with a different care team.

Pilot implementation of a perioperative protocol to guide operating room-to-intensive care unit patient handoffs.

OBJECTIVES: Perioperative handoffs are a particularly high-risk period given patients' postprocedural physiology, their physical transport through the hospital, and the triad transfer of personnel, information, and technology. The authors piloted a new perioperative handoff process to guide patient transfers from the cardiac operating room (OR) to the cardiac surgical intensive care unit (CSICU). The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of a standardized handoff process on patient care and provider satisfaction. DESIGN: A prospective, unblinded intervention study. SETTING: A CSICU in a teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred thirty-eight health care practitioners during the transfer of care of 60 patients. INTERVENTIONS: The implementation of a standardized handoff protocol and checklist. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: After the protocol's implementation, the presence of all handoff core team members at the bedside increased from 0% at baseline to 68% after intervention. The percentage of missed information in the surgery report decreased from 26% to 16% (p = 0.03), but the percentage of missed information in the anesthesia report showed no significant change (19% to 17%, p > 0.05). Handoff satisfaction scores among intensive care unit (ICU) nurses increased from 61% to 81%. On average, the duration of handoff increased by 1 minute. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized handoff protocol that guides the transfer of care from the OR team to the CSICU team can reduce the risk of missed information and improve satisfaction among perioperative providers.

Effect of postoperative epidural analgesia on morbidity and mortality after lung resection in Medicare patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To perform an analysis of the Medicare claims database in patients undergoing lung resection to determine whether there is an association between postoperative epidural analgesia and mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort (database) design. SETTING: University hospital. MEASUREMENTS: We examined a cohort of 3501 patients obtained from a 5% nationally random sample of 1997 to 2001 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent nonemergency segmental excision of the lung (International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes 32.3 and 32.4). Patient data were divided into two groups depending on the presence or absence of billing for postoperative epidural analgesia (Current Procedural Terminology code 01996). The primary outcomes assessed were death at 7 and 30 days after the procedure. The rates of major morbidity (acute myocardial infarction, angina, cardiac dysrhythmias, heart failure, pneumonia, pulmonary edema, respiratory failure, deep venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, acute renal failure, somnolence, acute cerebrovascular event, transient organic syndrome, and paralytic ileus) were also compared. Multivariate regression analysis incorporating race, gender, age, comorbidities, hospital size, hospital teaching status, and hospital technology status was performed to determine whether the presence of postoperative epidural analgesia had an independent effect on mortality or major morbidity. MAIN RESULTS: Multivariate regression analysis showed that the presence of epidural analgesia was associated with a significantly lower odds of death at 7 days (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence interval, 0.19-0.80; P = 0.001) and 30 days (odds ratio, 0.53; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.78; P = 0.002) after surgery. There was no difference between the groups with regard to overall major morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative epidural analgesia may contribute to lower odds of death after segmental excision of the lung, although the mechanism of such a benefit is not clear from our analysis.