RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Key goals during intracranial surgery are to facilitate rapid emergence and extubation for early neurologic evaluation. Longer-acting opioids are often avoided or administered at subtherapeutic doses due to their perceived risk of sedation and delayed emergence. However, inadequate analgesia and increased postoperative pain are common after intracranial surgery. In this multicenter study, we describe variability in opioid and nonopioid administration patterns in patients undergoing intracranial surgery. METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective observational cohort study using the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group database. Opioid and nonopioid practice patterns in 31,217 cases undergoing intracranial surgery across 11 institutions in the United States are described. RESULTS: Across all 11 institutions, total median [interquartile range] oral morphine equivalents, normalized to weight and anesthesia duration was 0.17 (0.08 to 0.3) mg.kg.min-1. There was a 7-fold difference in oral morphine equivalents between the lowest (0.05 [0.02 to 0.13] mg.kg.min-1) and highest (0.36 [0.18 to 0.54] mg.kg.min-1) prescribing institutions. Patients undergoing supratentorial surgery had higher normalized oral morphine equivalents compared with those having infratentorial surgery [0.17 [0.08-0.31] vs. 0.15 [0.07-0.27] mg/kg/min-1; P<0.001); however, this difference is clinically small. Nonopioid analgesics were not administered in 20% to 96.8% of cases across institutions. CONCLUSION: This study found wide variability for both opioid and nonopioid utilization at an institutional level. Future work on practitioner-level opioid and nonopioid use and its impact on outcomes after intracranial surgery should be conducted.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative hypotension is common during noncardiac surgery and is associated with postoperative myocardial infarction, acute kidney injury, stroke, and severe infection. The Hypotension Prediction Index software is an algorithm based on arterial waveform analysis that alerts clinicians of the patient's likelihood of experiencing a future hypotensive event, defined as mean arterial pressure < 65 mmHg for at least 1 min. METHODS: Two analyses included (1) a prospective, single-arm trial, with continuous blood pressure measurements from study monitors, compared to a historical comparison cohort. (2) A post hoc analysis of a subset of trial participants versus a propensity score-weighted contemporaneous comparison group, using external data from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG). The trial included 485 subjects in 11 sites; 406 were in the final effectiveness analysis. The post hoc analysis included 457 trial participants and 15,796 comparison patients. Patients were eligible if aged 18 years or older, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status 3 or 4, and scheduled for moderate- to high-risk noncardiac surgery expected to last at least 3 h. MEASUREMENTS: minutes of mean arterial pressure (MAP) below 65 mmHg and area under MAP < 65 mmHg. RESULTS: Analysis 1: Trial subjects (n = 406) experienced a mean of 9 ± 13 min of MAP below 65 mmHg, compared with the MPOG historical control mean of 25 ± 41 min, a 65% reduction (p < 0.001). Subjects with at least one episode of hypotension (n = 293) had a mean of 12 ± 14 min of MAP below 65 mmHg compared with the MPOG historical control mean of 28 ± 43 min, a 58% reduction (p< 0.001). Analysis 2: In the post hoc inverse probability treatment weighting model, patients in the trial demonstrated a 35% reduction in minutes of hypotension compared to a contemporaneous comparison group [exponentiated coefficient: - 0.35 (95%CI - 0.43, - 0.27); p < 0.001]. CONCLUSIONS: The use of prediction software for blood pressure management was associated with a clinically meaningful reduction in the duration of intraoperative hypotension. Further studies must investigate whether predictive algorithms to prevent hypotension can reduce adverse outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial number: NCT03805217. Registry URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03805217 . Principal investigator: Xiaodong Bao, MD, PhD. Date of registration: January 15, 2019.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Humanos , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Dor/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de RiscoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: There is insufficient prospective evidence regarding the relationship between surgical experience and prolonged opioid use and pain. The authors investigated the association of patient characteristics, surgical procedure, and perioperative anesthetic course with postoperative opioid consumption and pain 3 months postsurgery. The authors hypothesized that patient characteristics and intraoperative factors predict opioid consumption and pain 3 months postsurgery. METHODS: Eleven U.S. and one European institution enrolled patients scheduled for spine, open thoracic, knee, hip, or abdominal surgery, or mastectomy, in this multicenter, prospective observational study. Preoperative and postoperative data were collected using patient surveys and electronic medical records. Intraoperative data were collected from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group database. The association between postoperative opioid consumption and surgical site pain at 3 months, elicited from a telephone survey conducted at 3 months postoperatively, and demographics, psychosocial scores, pain scores, pain management, and case characteristics, was analyzed. RESULTS: Between September and October 2017, 3,505 surgical procedures met inclusion criteria. A total of 1,093 cases were included; 413 patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 680 (64%) for outcome analysis. Preoperatively, 135 (20%) patients were taking opioids. Three months postsurgery, 96 (14%) patients were taking opioids, including 23 patients (4%) who had not taken opioids preoperatively. A total of 177 patients (27%) reported surgical site pain, including 45 (13%) patients who had not reported pain preoperatively. The adjusted odds ratio for 3-month opioid use was 18.6 (credible interval, 10.3 to 34.5) for patients who had taken opioids preoperatively. The adjusted odds ratio for 3-month surgical site pain was 2.58 (1.45 to 4.4), 4.1 (1.73 to 8.9), and 2.75 (1.39 to 5.0) for patients who had site pain preoperatively, knee replacement, or spine surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative opioid use was the strongest predictor of opioid use 3 months postsurgery. None of the other variables showed clinically significant association with opioid use at 3 months after surgery.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides , Humanos , Feminino , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Estudos Prospectivos , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Mastectomia , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/tratamento farmacológico , Anestesia GeralRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Practice patterns related to intraoperative fluid administration and vasopressor use have potentially evolved over recent years. However, the extent of such changes and their association with perioperative outcomes, such as the development of acute kidney injury (AKI), have not been studied. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of major abdominal surgeries in adults across 26 US hospitals between 2015 and 2019. The primary outcome was AKI as defined by the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes definition (KDIGO) using only serum creatinine criteria. Univariable linear predictive additive models were used to describe the dose-dependent risk of AKI given fluid administration or vasopressor use. RESULTS: Over the study period, we observed a decrease in the volume of crystalloid administered, a decrease in the proportion of patients receiving more than 10 ml kg-1 h-1 of crystalloid, an increase in the amount of norepinephrine equivalents administered, and a decreased duration of hypotension. The incidence of AKI increased between 2016 and 2019. An increase of crystalloid administration from 1 to 10 ml kg-1 h-1 was associated with a 58% decreased risk of AKI. CONCLUSIONS: Despite decreased duration of hypotension during the study period, decreased fluid administration and increased vasopressor use were associated with increased incidence of AKI. Crystalloid administration below 10 ml kg-1 h-1 was associated with an increased risk of AKI. Although no causality can be concluded, these data suggest that prevention and treatment of hypotension during abdominal surgery with liberal use of vasopressors at the expense of fluid administration is associated with an increased risk of postoperative AKI.
Assuntos
Injúria Renal Aguda , Hipotensão , Abdome/cirurgia , Injúria Renal Aguda/epidemiologia , Injúria Renal Aguda/etiologia , Injúria Renal Aguda/terapia , Adulto , Soluções Cristaloides , Humanos , Hipotensão/complicações , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/terapia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores de Risco , Vasoconstritores/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Opioids remain the primary mode of analgesia intraoperatively. There are limited data on how patient, procedural, and institutional characteristics influence intraoperative opioid administration. The aim of this retrospective, longitudinal study from 2012 to 2016 was to assess how intraoperative opioid dosing varies by patient and clinical care factors and across multiple institutions over time. METHODS: Demographic, surgical procedural, anesthetic technique, and intraoperative analgesia data as putative variables of intraoperative opioid utilization were collected from 10 institutions. Log parenteral morphine equivalents (PME) was modeled in a multivariable linear regression model as a function of 15 covariates: 3 continuous covariates (age, anesthesia duration, year) and 12 factor covariates (peripheral block, neuraxial block, general anesthesia, emergency status, race, sex, remifentanil infusion, major surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] physical status, non-opioid analgesic count, Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group [MPOG] institution, surgery category). One interaction (year by MPOG institution) was included in the model. The regression model adjusted simultaneously for all included variables. Comparison of levels within a factor were reported as a ratio of medians with 95% credible intervals (CrI). RESULTS: A total of 1,104,324 cases between January 2012 and December 2016 were analyzed. The median (interquartile range) PME and standardized by weight PME per case for the study period were 15 (10-28) mg and 200 (111-347) µg/kg, respectively. As estimated in the multivariable model, there was a sustained decrease in opioid use (mean, 95% CrI) dropping from 152 (151-153) µg/kg in 2012 to 129 (129-130) µg/kg in 2016. The percent of variability in PME due to institution was 25.6% (24.8%-26.5%). Less opioids were prescribed in men (130 [129-130] µg/kg) than women (144 [143-145] µg/kg). The men to women PME ratio was 0.90 (0.89-0.90). There was substantial variability in PME administration among institutions, with the lowest being 80 (79-81) µg/kg and the highest being 186 (184-187) µg/kg; this is a PME ratio of 0.43 (0.42-0.43). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a reduction in intraoperative opioid administration over time, with variability in dose ranging between sexes and by procedure type. Furthermore, there was substantial variability in opioid use between institutions even when adjusting for multiple variables.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Padrões de Prática Médica , Adulto , Analgesia/estatística & dados numéricos , Teorema de Bayes , Feminino , Humanos , Estudos Longitudinais , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Morfina/uso terapêutico , Análise Multivariada , Avaliação de Resultados em Cuidados de Saúde , Manejo da Dor , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos OperatóriosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Communication amongst team members is critical to providing safe, effective medical care. We investigated the role of communication failures in patient injury using the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database. METHODS: Claims associated with surgical/procedural and obstetric anaesthesia and postoperative pain management for adverse events from 2004 or later were included. Communication was defined as transfer of information between two or more parties. Failure was defined as communication that was incomplete, inaccurate, absent, or not timely. We classified root causes of failures as content, audience, purpose, or occasion with inter-rater reliability assessed by kappa. Claims with communication failures contributing to injury (injury-related communication failures; n=389) were compared with claims without any communication failures (n=521) using Fisher's exact test, t-test, or Mann-Whitney U-tests. RESULTS: At least one communication failure contributing to patient injury occurred in 43% (n=389) out of 910 claims (κ=0.885). Patients in claims with injury-related communication failures were similar to patients in claims without failures, except that failures were more common in outpatient settings (34% vs 26%; P=0.004). Fifty-two claims had multiple communication failures for a total of 446 injury-related failures, and 47% of failures occurred during surgery, 28% preoperatively, and 23% postoperatively. Content failures (insufficient, inaccurate, or no information transmitted) accounted for 60% of the 446 communication failures. CONCLUSIONS: Communication failure contributed to patient injury in 43% of anaesthesia malpractice claims. Patient/case characteristics in claims with communication failures were similar to those without failures, except that failures were more common in outpatient settings.
Assuntos
Analgesia/efeitos adversos , Anestesia/efeitos adversos , Comunicação Interdisciplinar , Imperícia , Erros Médicos , Equipe de Assistência ao Paciente , Relações Médico-Paciente , Relações Profissional-Família , Adulto , Idoso , Anestesia Obstétrica/efeitos adversos , Bases de Dados Factuais , Feminino , Humanos , Seguro de Responsabilidade Civil , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Segurança do Paciente , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Análise de Causa FundamentalRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative hypotension is common and associated with organ injury and death, although randomized data showing a causal relationship remain sparse. A risk-adjusted measure of intraoperative hypotension may therefore contribute to quality improvement efforts. METHODS: The measure we developed defines hypotension as a mean arterial pressure <65 mm Hg sustained for at least 15 cumulative minutes. Comparisons are based on whether clinicians have more or fewer cases of hypotension than expected over 12 months, given their patient mix. The measure was developed and evaluated with data from 225,389 surgeries in 5 hospitals. We assessed discrimination and calibration of the risk adjustment model, then calculated the distribution of clinician-level measure scores, and finally estimated the signal-to-noise reliability and predictive validity of the measure. RESULTS: The risk adjustment model showed acceptable calibration and discrimination (area under the curve was 0.72 and 0.73 in different validation samples). Clinician-level, risk-adjusted scores varied widely, and 36% of clinicians had significantly more cases of intraoperative hypotension than predicted. Clinician-level score distributions differed across hospitals, indicating substantial hospital-level variation. The mean signal-to-noise reliability estimate was 0.87 among all clinicians and 0.94 among clinicians with >30 cases during the 12-month measurement period. Kidney injury and in-hospital mortality were most common in patients whose anesthesia providers had worse scores. However, a sensitivity analysis in 1 hospital showed that score distributions differed markedly between anesthesiology fellows and attending anesthesiologists or certified registered nurse anesthetists; score distributions also varied as a function of the fraction of cases that were inpatients. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative hypotension was common and was associated with acute kidney injury and in-hospital mortality. There were substantial variations in clinician-level scores, and the measure score distribution suggests that there may be opportunity to reduce hypotension which may improve patient safety and outcomes. However, sensitivity analyses suggest that some portion of the variation results from limitations of risk adjustment. Future versions of the measure should risk adjust for important patient and procedural factors including comorbidities and surgical complexity, although this will require more consistent structured data capture in anesthesia information management systems. Including structured data on additional risk factors may improve hypotension risk prediction which is integral to the measure's validity.
Assuntos
Pressão Arterial , Técnicas de Apoio para a Decisão , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/efeitos adversos , Hipotensão/etiologia , Injúria Renal Aguda/etiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Eletivos/mortalidade , Feminino , Mortalidade Hospitalar , Humanos , Hipotensão/diagnóstico , Hipotensão/mortalidade , Hipotensão/fisiopatologia , Período Intraoperatório , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados Unidos , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients are at increased risk for pulmonary and cardiovascular complications; perioperative mortality risk is unclear. This report analyzes cases submitted to the OSA Death and Near Miss Registry, focusing on factors associated with poor outcomes after an OSA-related event. We hypothesized that more severe outcomes would be associated with OSA severity, less intense monitoring, and higher cumulative opioid doses. METHODS: Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, OSA diagnosed or suspected, event related to OSA, and event occurrence 1992 or later and <30 days postoperatively. Factors associated with death or brain damage versus other critical events were analyzed by tests of association and odds ratios (OR; 95% confidence intervals [CIs]). RESULTS: Sixty-six cases met inclusion criteria with known OSA diagnosed in 55 (83%). Patients were middle aged (mean = 53, standard deviation [SD] = 15 years), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) III (59%, n = 38), and obese (mean body mass index [BMI] = 38, SD = 9 kg/m); most had inpatient (80%, n = 51) and elective (90%, n = 56) procedures with general anesthesia (88%, n = 58). Most events occurred on the ward (56%, n = 37), and 14 (21%) occurred at home. Most events (76%, n = 50) occurred within 24 hours of anesthesia end. Ninety-seven percent (n = 64) received opioids within the 24 hours before the event, and two-thirds (41 of 62) also received sedatives. Positive airway pressure devices and/or supplemental oxygen were in use at the time of critical events in 7.5% and 52% of cases, respectively. Sixty-five percent (n = 43) of patients died or had brain damage; 35% (n = 23) experienced other critical events. Continuous central respiratory monitoring was in use for 3 of 43 (7%) of cases where death or brain damage resulted. Death or brain damage was (1) less common when the event was witnessed than unwitnessed (OR = 0.036; 95% CI, 0.007-0.181; P < .001); (2) less common with supplemental oxygen in place (OR = 0.227; 95% CI, 0.070-0.740; P = .011); (3) less common with respiratory monitoring versus no monitoring (OR = 0.109; 95% CI, 0.031-0.384; P < .001); and (4) more common in patients who received both opioids and sedatives than opioids alone (OR = 4.133; 95% CI, 1.348-12.672; P = .011). No evidence for an association was observed between outcomes and OSA severity or cumulative opioid dose. CONCLUSIONS: Death and brain damage were more likely to occur with unwitnessed events, no supplemental oxygen, lack of respiratory monitoring, and coadministration of opioids and sedatives. It is important that efforts be directed at providing more effective monitoring for OSA patients following surgery, and clinicians consider the potentially dangerous effects of opioids and sedatives-especially when combined-when managing OSA patients postoperatively.
Assuntos
Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/complicações , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Anestesia Geral , Encefalopatias/induzido quimicamente , Encefalopatias/epidemiologia , Estado Terminal/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Hipnóticos e Sedativos/efeitos adversos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Monitorização Fisiológica , Obesidade/complicações , Obesidade/mortalidade , Polissonografia , Respiração com Pressão Positiva , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/mortalidade , Sistema de RegistrosRESUMO
Platelet-rich plasma (PRP) is a clinically relevant source of growth factors used commonly by surgeons. The clinical efficacy of PRP use as reported in the literature is widely variable which is likely attributed to poorly defined retention time of PRP at the repair site. To overcome this limitation, branched poly(ester urea) (PEU) nanofibers were used to adsorb and retain PRP at the implant site in an acute rotator-cuff tear model in rats. The adsorption of PRP to the branched-PEU 8% material was characterized using quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) and immuno-protein assay. After adsorption of PRP to the nanofiber sheet, the platelets actively released proteins. The adhesion of platelets to the nanofiber material was confirmed by immunofluorescence using a p-selectin antibody. In vivo testing using a rat rotator-cuff repair model compared five groups; no repair (control), suture repair only, repair with disc implant (Disc), repair with PRP-soaked disc (Disc PRP), and a PRP injection (PRP). Mechanical testing at 84 d for the four surgical repair groups resulted in a higher stiffness (11.8 ± 3.8 N/mm, 13.5 ± 3.8 N/mm, 16.8 ± 5.8 N/mm, 12.2 ± 2.6 N/mm, respectively) for the Disc PRP group. Histological staining using trichrome, hematoxylin, and eosin Y (H&E), and safranin O confirmed more collagen organization in the Disc PRP group at 21 and 84 d. Limited inflammation and recovery toward preoperative mechanical properties indicate PEU nanofiber discs as translationally relevant.
Assuntos
Procedimentos Ortopédicos/métodos , Plasma Rico em Plaquetas/química , Poliésteres/química , Lesões do Manguito Rotador/cirurgia , Alicerces Teciduais/química , Ureia/análogos & derivados , Animais , Células Cultivadas , Feminino , Humanos , Peptídeos e Proteínas de Sinalização Intercelular/metabolismo , Nanofibras/química , Plasma Rico em Plaquetas/metabolismo , Ratos , Ratos Sprague-DawleyRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Although spine surgery is associated with significant morbidity, the anesthesia liability profile for spine surgery is not known. We examined claims for spine procedures in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database to evaluate patterns of injury and liability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed. Inclusion criteria were anesthesia claims provided for surgical procedures in 2000 to 2014. We compared mechanisms of injury for cervical spine to thoracic or lumbar spine procedures using χ and the Fisher exact test. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were used to determine factors associated with permanent disabling injury in spine surgery claims. RESULTS: The 207 spine procedure (73% thoracic/lumbar; 27% cervical) claims comprised >10% of claims. Permanent disabling injuries to nerves, the spinal cord, and the eyes or visual pathways were more common with spine procedures than in nonspine procedures. Hemorrhage and positioning injuries were more common in thoracic/lumbar spine claims, whereas difficult intubation was more common in cervical spine claims. Multiple logistic regression demonstrated prone positioning (odds ratio=3.50; 95% confidence interval, 1.30-9.43) and surgical duration of ≥4 hours increased the odds of severe permanent injury in spine claims (odds ratio=2.73; 95% confidence interval, 1.11-6.72). CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesia claims related to spine surgery were associated with severe permanent disability primarily from nerve and eye injuries. Prone positioning and surgical duration of ≥4 hours were associated with permanent disabling injuries. Attention to positioning, resuscitation during blood loss, and reducing length of surgery may reduce these complications.
Assuntos
Responsabilidade Legal , Procedimentos Neurocirúrgicos/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Neurocirúrgicos/legislação & jurisprudência , Coluna Vertebral/cirurgia , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Anestesia/efeitos adversos , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica , Estudos de Coortes , Traumatismos Oculares/etiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Posicionamento do Paciente , Traumatismos dos Nervos Periféricos/etiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Traumatismos da Medula Espinal/etiologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Malpractice claims that arise during the perioperative care of patients receiving orthopaedic procedures will frequently involve both orthopaedic surgeons and anesthesiologists. The Anesthesia Closed Claims database contains anesthesia malpractice claim data that can be used to investigate patient safety events arising during the care of orthopaedic patients and can provide insight into the medicolegal liability shared by the two specialties. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) How do orthopaedic anesthetic malpractice claims differ from other anesthesia claims with regard to patient and case characteristics, common events and injuries, and liability profile? (2) What are the characteristics of patients who had neuraxial hematomas after spinal and epidural anesthesia for orthopaedic procedures? (3) What are the characteristics of patients who had orthopaedic anesthesia malpractice claims for central ischemic neurologic injury occurring during shoulder surgery in the beach chair position? (4) What are the characteristics of patients who had malpractice claims for respiratory depression and respiratory arrests in the postoperative period? METHODS: The Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database was the source of data for this study. This national database derives data from a panel of liability companies (national and regional) and includes closed malpractice claims against anesthesiologists representing > 30% of practicing anesthesiologists in the United States from all types of practice settings (hospital, surgery centers, and offices). Claims for damage to teeth or dentures are not included in the database. Patient characteristics, type of anesthesia, damaging events, outcomes, and liability characteristics of anesthesia malpractice claims for events occurring in the years 2000 to 2013 related to nonspine orthopaedic surgery (n = 475) were compared with claims related to other procedures (n = 1592) with p < 0.05 as the criterion for statistical significance and two-tailed tests. Odds ratios and their 95% confidence intervals were calculated for all comparisons. Three types of claims involving high-impact injuries in patients undergoing nonspine orthopaedic surgery were identified through database query for in-depth descriptive review: neuraxial hematoma (n = 10), central ischemic neurologic injury in the beach chair position (n = 9), and injuries caused by postoperative respiratory depression (n = 23). RESULTS: Nonspine orthopaedic anesthesia malpractice claims were more frequently associated with nerve injuries (125 of 475 [26%], odds ratio [OR] 2.12 [1.66-2.71]) and events arising from the use of regional anesthesia (125 of 475 [26%], OR 6.18 (4.59-8.32) than in malpractice claims in other areas of anesthesia malpractice (230 of 1592 [14%] and 87 of 1592 [6%], respectively, p < 0.001 for both comparisons). Ninety percent (nine of 10) of patients with claims for neuraxial hematomas were receiving anticoagulant medication and all had severe long-term injuries, most with a history of significant delay in diagnosis and treatment after first appearance of signs and symptoms. Central ischemic injuries occurring during orthopaedic surgery in the beach chair position did not occur solely in patients who would have been considered at high risk for ischemic stroke. Patients with malpractice claims for injuries resulting from postoperative respiratory depression events had undergone lower extremity procedures (20 of 23 [87%]) and most events (22 of 23 [96%]) occurred on the day of surgery or the first postoperative day. CONCLUSIONS: Nonspine orthopaedic anesthesia malpractice claims more frequently cited nerve injury and events arising from the use of regional anesthesia than other surgical anesthesia malpractice claims. This may reflect the frequency of regional anesthesia in orthopaedic cases rather than increased risk of injury associated with regional techniques. When neuraxial procedures and anticoagulation regimens are used concurrently, care pathways should emphasize clear lines of responsibility for coordination of care and early investigation of any unusual neurologic findings that might indicate neuraxial hematoma. We do not have a good understanding of the factors that render some patients vulnerable to the rare occurrence of intraoperative central ischemic injury in the beach chair position, but providers should carefully calculate cerebral perfusion pressure relative to measured blood pressure for patients in the upright position. Postoperative use of multiple opioids by different concurrent modes of administration warrant special precautions with consideration given to the provision of care in settings with enhanced respiratory monitoring. The limitations of retrospective closed claims database review prevent conclusions regarding causation. Nonetheless, the collection of relatively rare events with substantial clinical detail provides valuable data to generate hypotheses about causation with potential for future study to improve patient safety. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
Assuntos
Anestesia/efeitos adversos , Seguro de Responsabilidade Civil , Responsabilidade Legal , Imperícia , Procedimentos Ortopédicos/efeitos adversos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Anestesia Epidural/efeitos adversos , Raquianestesia/efeitos adversos , Doenças do Sistema Nervoso Central/etiologia , Distribuição de Qui-Quadrado , Mineração de Dados , Bases de Dados Factuais , Feminino , Hematoma/etiologia , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Razão de Chances , Posicionamento do Paciente/efeitos adversos , Insuficiência Respiratória/etiologia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Resultado do Tratamento , Estados UnidosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Due to an increase in implantable device-related anesthesia pain medicine claims, the authors investigated anesthesia liability associated with these devices. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, the authors identified 148 pain medicine device claims from 1990 or later in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project Database. Device-related damaging events included medication administration events, infections, hematomas, retained catheter fragments, cerebrospinal fluid leaks, cord or cauda equina trauma, device placed at wrong level, stimulator incorrectly programmed, delay in recognition of granuloma formation, and other issues. RESULTS: The most common devices were implantable drug delivery systems (IDDS; 64%) and spinal cord stimulators (29%). Device-related care consisted of surgical device procedures (n = 107) and IDDS maintenance (n = 41). Severity of injury was greater in IDDS maintenance claims (56% death or severe permanent injury) than in surgical device procedures (26%, P < 0.001). Death and brain damage in IDDS maintenance claims resulted from medication administration errors (n = 13; 32%); spinal cord injury resulted from delayed recognition of granuloma formation (n = 9; 22%). The most common damaging events for surgical device procedures were infections, inadequate pain relief, cord trauma, retained catheter fragments, and subcutaneous hygroma. Care was more commonly assessed as less than appropriate (78%) and payments more common (63%) in IDDS maintenance than in surgical device procedure claims (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Half of IDDS maintenance claims were associated with death or permanent severe injury, most commonly from medication errors or failure to recognize progressive neurologic deterioration. Practitioners implanting or managing devices for chronic pain should exercise caution in these areas to minimize patient harm.
Assuntos
Dor Crônica/terapia , Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica/efeitos adversos , Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica/instrumentação , Bombas de Infusão Implantáveis/efeitos adversos , Seguro de Responsabilidade Civil/estatística & dados numéricos , Imperícia/estatística & dados numéricos , Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica/economia , Feminino , Humanos , Bombas de Infusão Implantáveis/economia , Bombas de Infusão Implantáveis/estatística & dados numéricos , Revisão da Utilização de Seguros/economia , Revisão da Utilização de Seguros/estatística & dados numéricos , Seguro de Responsabilidade Civil/economia , Masculino , Imperícia/economia , Pessoa de Meia-IdadeAssuntos
Imperícia/legislação & jurisprudência , Erros Médicos/legislação & jurisprudência , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/complicações , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/legislação & jurisprudência , Feminino , Humanos , MasculinoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Postoperative opioid-induced respiratory depression (RD) is a significant cause of death and brain damage in the perioperative period. The authors examined anesthesia closed malpractice claims associated with RD to determine whether patterns of injuries could guide preventative strategies. METHODS: From the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database of 9,799 claims, three authors reviewed 357 acute pain claims that occurred between 1990 and 2009 for the likelihood of RD using literature-based criteria. Previously cited patient risk factors for RD, clinical management, nursing assessments, and timing of events were abstracted from claim narratives to identify recurrent patterns. RESULTS: RD was judged as possible, probable, or definite in 92 claims (κ = 0.690) of which 77% resulted in severe brain damage or death. The vast majority of RD events (88%) occurred within 24 h of surgery, and 97% were judged as preventable with better monitoring and response. Contributing and potentially actionable factors included multiple prescribers (33%), concurrent administration of nonopioid sedating medications (34%), and inadequate nursing assessments or response (31%). The time between the last nursing check and the discovery of a patient with RD was within 2 h in 42% and within 15 min in 16% of claims. Somnolence was noted in 62% of patients before the event. CONCLUSIONS: This claims review supports a growing consensus that opioid-related adverse events are multifactorial and potentially preventable with improvements in assessment of sedation level, monitoring of oxygenation and ventilation, and early response and intervention, particularly within the first 24 h postoperatively.
Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Revisão da Utilização de Seguros , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/induzido quimicamente , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/epidemiologia , Insuficiência Respiratória/induzido quimicamente , Insuficiência Respiratória/epidemiologia , Adulto , Idoso , Anestesia/efeitos adversos , Bases de Dados Factuais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/diagnóstico , Insuficiência Respiratória/diagnósticoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: Prior investigations have suggested that the rapidly growing population of adults with congenital heart disease is at increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality, but information is limited on the nature of those perioperative factors that may relate to adverse outcomes. We sought to use a national claims database to describe the contribution of perioperative factors to adverse outcomes and compare contributing factors in cardiac vs. noncardiac operations. DESIGN: The study is a retrospective in-depth structured analysis of cases from the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database. SETTING: We examined the largest national anesthesia malpractice claims database. PATIENTS: We included all claims cases involving adult patients with congenital heart disease (CHD). INTERVENTIONS: Patients in this retrospective analysis were classified by type of surgery (cardiac or noncardiac). OUTCOME MEASURES: Perioperative factors contributing to an adverse event were assessed by an expert panel of cardiac anesthesiologists. RESULTS: Of 21 confirmed cases, 11 (52%) involved cardiac procedures and 10 (48%) noncardiac procedures. The most common factors contributing to the adverse event in cardiac cases were surgical technique (73% of cases) and intraoperative anesthetic care (55%), whereas in noncardiac cases, postoperative monitoring/care (50%), CHD (50%) and preoperative assessment or optimization (40%) were most common. The factors contributing to the patient injury differed similarly: in cardiac cases, the most common factors were intraoperative anesthetic care (55%) and surgical technique (45%) compared with postoperative monitoring/care (50%) and CHD (50%) in noncardiac cases. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of a small number of events in a claims-based database, this study offers advantages of being a national, structured analysis of real cases to provide detailed information on phenomena that are otherwise abstract and hypothesized by expert opinion. These results should help affirm the role of anesthesiologists in acquiring and executing expertise as consultants in perioperative medicine for adults with congenital heart disease patients.
Assuntos
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos , Cardiopatias Congênitas/cirurgia , Adulto , Fatores Etários , Serviço Hospitalar de Anestesia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Cardíacos/mortalidade , Bases de Dados Factuais , Feminino , Cardiopatias Congênitas/diagnóstico , Cardiopatias Congênitas/mortalidade , Humanos , Masculino , Imperícia , Estudos Retrospectivos , Medição de Risco , Fatores de Risco , Fatores de Tempo , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto JovemRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Hemorrhage is a potentially preventable cause of adverse outcomes in surgical and obstetric patients. New understanding of the pathophysiology of hemorrhagic shock, including development of coagulopathy, has led to evolution of recommendations for treatment. However, no recent study has examined the legal outcomes of these claims. The authors reviewed closed anesthesia malpractice claims related to hemorrhage, seeking common factors to guide future management strategies. METHODS: The authors analyzed 3,211 closed surgical or obstetric anesthesia malpractice claims from 1995 to 2011 in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project. Claims where patient injury was attributed to hemorrhage were compared with all other surgical and obstetric claims. Risk factors for hemorrhage and coagulopathy, clinical factors, management, and communication issues were abstracted from claim narratives to identify recurrent patterns. RESULTS: Hemorrhage occurred in 141 (4%) claims. Obstetrics accounted for 30% of hemorrhage claims compared with 13% of nonhemorrhage claims (P < 0.001); thoracic or lumbar spine surgery was similarly overrepresented (24 vs. 6%, P < 0.001). Mortality was higher in hemorrhage than nonhemorrhage claims (77 vs. 27%, P < 0.001), and anesthesia care was more often judged to be less than appropriate (55 vs. 38%, P < 0.001). Median payments were higher in hemorrhage versus nonhemorrhage claims ($607,750 vs. $276,000, P < 0.001). Risk factors for hemorrhage and coagulopathy were common, and initiation of transfusion therapy was commonly delayed. CONCLUSIONS: Hemorrhage is a rare, but serious, cause of anesthesia malpractice claims. Understanding which patients are at risk can aid in patient referral decisions, design of institutional systems for responding to hemorrhage, and education of surgeons, obstetricians, and anesthesiologists.