Handling injectable medications in anaesthesia: Guidelines from the Association of Anaesthetists.

Peri-operative medication safety is complex. Avoidance of medication errors is both system- and practitioner-based, and many departments within the hospital contribute to safe and effective systems. For the individual anaesthetist, drawing up, labelling and then the correct administration of medications are key components in a patient's peri-operative journey. These guidelines aim to provide pragmatic safety steps for the practitioner and other individuals within the operative environment, as well as short- to long-term goals for development of a collaborative approach to reducing errors. The aim is that they will be used as a basis for instilling good practice.

Defining the decision-to-delivery interval at caesarean section: narrative literature review and proposal for standardisation.

The decision-to-delivery interval is a widely used term at non-elective caesarean section. While the definition may appear self-evident, there is no universally agreed consensus about when this period begins and ends. We reviewed the literature for original research utilising the terms 'decision-to-delivery', 'decision-to-incision' or 'incision-to-delivery' and examined definitions used for decision, delivery, incision, as well as any additional time intervals that were assessed. Our analysis demonstrated an inconsistent non-standardised approach to defining these intervals, which might have clinical practice and medicolegal ramifications. We propose that the decision-to-delivery interval should be defined as follows: the interval between the time at which the senior obstetrician makes the decision that a caesarean section is required and the time at which the fetus (or first fetus in the case of multiples) is delivered. The decision time should ideally be recorded contemporaneously in the medical notes or partogram.

Anticipated difficult airway during obstetric general anaesthesia: narrative literature review and management recommendations.

We reviewed the literature on management of general and regional anaesthesia in pregnant women with anticipated airway difficulty. We identified 138 publications comprising 158 cases; these either described equipment or techniques for the provision of general anaesthesia, or the management of women with regional analgesia or anaesthesia, with the aim of avoiding general anaesthesia. Most of the former group described women requiring caesarean section alone, or in combination with other surgery, which was sometimes airway-related. Management techniques were largely similar to those in non-obstetric patients requiring surgery who have airway difficulties, although suggested differences related to physiological changes of pregnancy and avoidance of nasal intubation. In the reports discussing regional anaesthesia, consideration was often given to the possible requirement for urgent out-of-hours anaesthetic intervention, and the predicted difficulty of management of general anaesthesia should it be required. In a number of reported cases, multidisciplinary planning led to the conclusion that elective caesarean section should be performed in order to avoid emergency airway management. Based on this literature review, we advise antenatal planning that includes: assessment of the patient's clinical characteristics; consideration of the equipment and personnel available to provide safe airway management out-of-hours; and elective caesarean section should these be lacking. If general anaesthesia is required, a risk assessment must be made as to the probability of safe airway management after the induction of anaesthesia, and awake tracheal intubation should be used if this cannot be assured. Decision aids are provided to illustrate these points. Online appendices include a comprehensive compendium of case reports on the management of a number of rare syndromes and airway conditions.

Guideline on anaesthesia and sedation in breastfeeding women 2020: Guideline from the Association of Anaesthetists.

Breastfeeding has many health benefits for the mother and infant. Women who are breastfeeding may require anaesthesia or sedation. Concerns regarding the passage of drugs into breast milk may lead to inconsistent advice from professionals. This can sometimes result in the interruption of feeding for 24 hours or longer after anaesthesia, or expressing and discarding ('pumping and dumping') breast milk; this may contribute to early cessation of breastfeeding. However, there are data regarding the transfer of most anaesthetic drugs into breast milk. We advise that breastfeeding is acceptable to continue after anaesthesia and should be supported as soon as the woman is alert and able to feed, without the need to discard breast milk. We provide evidence-based information on the pharmacokinetics of drugs commonly used during anaesthesia so that professionals can undertake a risk-benefit discussion with the woman. We advise the development of local policies that aid logistical planning and guide staff to facilitate breastfeeding during the woman's hospital stay.

Multicentre clinical simulation evaluation of the ISO 80369-6 neuraxial non-Luer connector.

To avoid potentially fatal wrong-route neuraxial drug errors, international standard ISO 80369-6 specifying a non-Luer neuraxial connector design was published in 2016. We describe usability studies used in development of the design. Thirty-eight doctors and 17 nurses performed simulated procedures on manikins, using devices fitted with Luer connectors or draft ISO 80369-6 'non-Luer' connectors. The procedures included spinal anaesthesia; intrathecal chemotherapy; lumbar puncture, cerebrospinal fluid collection and pressure measurement; epidural catheter placement with bolus injection and critical care use. Participants attempted cross connection between neuraxial connectors and a range of other medical device connectors, including those from the ISO 80369 small-bore connector series. Video recording analysis was used for all assessments. Participants subjectively assessed performance of the draft non-Luer connector, including suitability for routine clinical use. Participants performed 198 procedures. The connector achieved easy, leak-free connections. The willingness of participants to use the non-Luer connectors were: spinal anaesthesia 100%; intrathecal chemotherapy 88%; lumbar puncture, cerebrospinal fluid collection and pressure measurement 93%; epidural catheter placement with bolus injection 78%; critical care use 100%. Concerns raised were generally device related, rather than connector related. Most cross-connection attempts failed, even using above clinical forces and, when successful, were judged of low clinical risk potential; the exception was a malaligned connection between the non-Luer slip and female Luer connectors. This led to revision of the dimensional tolerances of the non-Luer connector to reduce this risk, before publication of the final specification in 2016. We conclude that the ISO 80369-6 neuraxial non-Luer connector is suitable for clinical use.

International consensus statement on the use of uterotonic agents during caesarean section.

It is routine to give a uterotonic drug following delivery of the neonate during caesarean section. However, there is much heterogeneity in the relevant research, which has largely been performed in low-risk elective cases or women with uncomplicated labour. This is reflected in considerable variation in clinical practice. There are significant differences between dose requirements during elective and intrapartum caesarean section. Standard recommended doses are higher than required, with the potential for acute cardiovascular adverse effects. We recommend a small initial bolus dose of oxytocin, followed by a titrated infusion. The recommended doses of oxytocin may have to be increased in women with risk factors for uterine atony. Carbetocin at equipotent doses to oxytocin has similar actions, while avoiding the requirement for a continuous infusion after the initial dose and reducing the need for additional uterotonics. As with oxytocin, carbetocin dose requirements are higher for intrapartum caesarean sections. A second-line agent should be considered early if oxytocin/carbetocin fails to produce good uterine tone. Women with cardiac disease may be very sensitive to the adverse effects of oxytocin and other uterotonics, and their management needs to be individualised.

Guidelines for the safe provision of anaesthesia in magnetic resonance units 2019: Guidelines from the Association of Anaesthetists and the Neuro Anaesthesia and Critical Care Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

There has been an increase in the number of units providing anaesthesia for magnetic resonance imaging and the strength of magnetic resonance scanners, as well as the number of interventions and operations performed within the magnetic resonance environment. More devices and implants are now magnetic resonance imaging conditional, allowing scans to be undertaken in patients for whom this was previously not possible. There has also been a revision in terminology relating to magnetic resonance safety of devices. These guidelines have been put together by organisations who are involved in the pathways for patients needing magnetic resonance imaging. They reinforce the safety aspects of providing anaesthesia in the magnetic resonance environment, from the multidisciplinary decision making process, the seniority of anaesthetist accompanying the patient, to training in the recognition of hazards of anaesthesia in the magnetic resonance environment. For many anaesthetists this is an unfamiliar site to give anaesthesia, often in a remote site. Hospitals should develop and audit governance procedures to ensure that anaesthetists of all grades are competent to deliver anaesthesia safely in this area.

Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association and Difficult Airway Society guidelines for the management of difficult and failed tracheal intubation in obstetrics.

The Obstetric Anaesthetists' Association and Difficult Airway Society have developed the first national obstetric guidelines for the safe management of difficult and failed tracheal intubation during general anaesthesia. They comprise four algorithms and two tables. A master algorithm provides an overview. Algorithm 1 gives a framework on how to optimise a safe general anaesthetic technique in the obstetric patient, and emphasises: planning and multidisciplinary communication; how to prevent the rapid oxygen desaturation seen in pregnant women by advocating nasal oxygenation and mask ventilation immediately after induction; limiting intubation attempts to two; and consideration of early release of cricoid pressure if difficulties are encountered. Algorithm 2 summarises the management after declaring failed tracheal intubation with clear decision points, and encourages early insertion of a (preferably second-generation) supraglottic airway device if appropriate. Algorithm 3 covers the management of the 'can't intubate, can't oxygenate' situation and emergency front-of-neck airway access, including the necessity for timely perimortem caesarean section if maternal oxygenation cannot be achieved. Table 1 gives a structure for assessing the individual factors relevant in the decision to awaken or proceed should intubation fail, which include: urgency related to maternal or fetal factors; seniority of the anaesthetist; obesity of the patient; surgical complexity; aspiration risk; potential difficulty with provision of alternative anaesthesia; and post-induction airway device and airway patency. This decision should be considered by the team in advance of performing a general anaesthetic to make a provisional plan should failed intubation occur. The table is also intended to be used as a teaching tool to facilitate discussion and learning regarding the complex nature of decision-making when faced with a failed intubation. Table 2 gives practical considerations of how to awaken or proceed with surgery. The background paper covers recommendations on drugs, new equipment, teaching and training.

A comparison of the pelvic angle applied using lateral table tilt or a pelvic wedge at elective caesarean section.

Lateral table tilt or a pelvic wedge are commonly used to reduce inferior vena cava compression during obstetric anaesthesia in the supine position. Direct measurement of pelvic angle allows individual assessment of the effectiveness of these manoeuvres in achieving a tilted position. We observed routine practice during caesarean section after random allocation to one or other of these methods. The anaesthetist managing the case was asked to position the women after induction of spinal anaesthesia using either left table tilt or a wedge under the right hip. We then measured pelvic angle in all women, and the table angle in women who had table tilt. The mean (SD [range]) pelvic angle was 20.2° (8.1° [9°-37°]) in 18 women with table tilt and 21.0° (7.5° [10°-36°]) in 17 women with a wedge. The mean (SD [range]) table angle was 12.4° (3.1° [8°-21°]) in the women with table tilt. There was a significant difference between table angle and pelvic angle in the women with table tilt (p = 0.0003), but no significant difference in pelvic angle between the table tilt and wedge groups. Measurement of table angle does not represent pelvic position adequately in the majority of women. However, this study showed that lateral table tilt and a pelvic wedge were equally effective in producing tilt of the pelvis.

A clinical evaluation of four non-Luer spinal needle and syringe systems.

We performed an evaluation of non-Luer spinal devices supplied by four manufacturers or suppliers: Polymedic; Pajunk; Sarstedt; and Smiths. For each supplier, 100 evaluations were performed using a 25-G 90-mm spinal needle, 3-ml syringe, 5-ml syringe and filter needle; for comparison, 100 evaluations were performed with our standard Luer equipment. The non-Luer devices were associated with more qualitative problems compared with the Luer devices, for example, poor feel of dural puncture (9-32% vs 10%, respectively), poor observation of cerebrospinal fluid in the hub (3-27% vs 0%), and connection problem of the syringe to the spinal needle (7-33% vs 0%). There was also more frequent failure to achieve the spinal injection due to equipment-related causes (4-7% vs 0%, respectively). Median (IQR [range]) numeric satisfaction scores for the spinal needles were: Luer 10 (9-10 [7-10]); Polymedic 7 (4-8 [0-10]; Pajunk 7 (5-8 [0-10]); Sarstedt 7 (6-8 [0-10]); and Smiths 9 (7-10 [0-10]) (p<0.0001). Satisfaction scores for all spinal equipment were: Luer 10 (9-10 [5-10]); Polymedic 8 (6-8 [0-10]); Pajunk 7 (5-7 [1-9]); Sarstedt 8 (6-8 [0-10]); and Smiths 8 (8-9 [2-10]) (p<0.0001). Between 21% and 75% of non-Luer evaluations were rated with satisfaction worse than the usual Luer needle compared with 0-10% rated better, depending on the needle type. Between 22% and 76% of non-Luer evaluations were rated with satisfaction worse than the usual Luer equipment compared with 0-14% rated better. Specific concerns included poor feel of tissue planes and observation of cerebrospinal fluid (Polymedic), difficulty with connection of the syringe to the spinal needle and trocar removal (Pajunk), poor feel of tissue planes and needle flexibility (Sarstedt) and difficulty with connection of the syringe to the spinal needle (Smiths). We could not demonstrate a short-term learning curve for the new devices. Decisions on purchasing and implementation of the new non-Luer equipment will have to acknowledge that clinicians may have greater technical problems and reduced satisfaction compared with the current equipment.