Ease and comfort of pre-oxygenation with high-flow nasal oxygen cannulae vs. facemask: a randomised controlled trial.

The Difficult Airway Society recommends that all patients should be pre-oxygenated before the induction of general anaesthesia, but this may not always be easy or comfortable and anaesthesia may often be induced without full pre-oxygenation. We tested the hypothesis that high-flow nasal oxygen cannulae would be easier and more comfortable than facemasks for pre-oxygenation. We randomly allocated 199 patients undergoing elective surgery aged ≥ 10 years to pre-oxygenation using either high-flow nasal oxygen or facemask. Ease and comfort were assessed by anaesthetists and patients on 10-cm visual analogue scale and six-point smiley face scale, respectively. Secondary endpoints included end-tidal oxygen fraction after securing a definitive airway and time to secure an airway. A mean difference (95%CI) between groups in ratings of -0.76 (-1.25 to -0.27) cm for ease of use (p = 0.003) and -0.45 (-0.75 to -0.13) points for comfort (p = 0.006), both favoured high-flow nasal oxygen. A mean difference (95%CI) between groups in end-tidal oxygen fraction of 3.89% (2.41-5.37%) after securing a definitive airway also favoured high-flow nasal oxygen (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference between groups in the number of patients with hypoxaemia (Sp O2 < 90%) or severe hypoxaemia (Sp O2 < 85%) lasting ≥ 1 min or ≥ 2 min; in the proportion of patients with an end-tidal oxygen fraction < 87% in the first 5 min after tracheal intubation (52.2% vs. 58.9% in facemask and high-flow nasal oxygen groups, respectively; p = 0.31); or in time taken to secure an airway (11.6 vs. 12.2 min in facemask and high-flow nasal oxygen groups, respectively; p = 0.65). In conclusion, we found pre-oxygenation with high-flow nasal oxygen to be easier for anaesthetists and more comfortable for patients than pre-oxygenation with a facemask, with no clinically relevant differences in end-tidal oxygen fraction after securing a definitive airway or time to secure an airway. The differences in ease and comfort were modest.

A retrospective audit of postoperative days alive and out of hospital, including before and after implementation of the WHO surgical safety checklist.

We implemented the World Health Organization surgical safety checklist at Auckland City Hospital from November 2007. We hypothesised that the checklist would reduce postoperative mortality and increase days alive and out of hospital, both measured to 90 postoperative days. We compared outcomes for cohorts who had surgery during 18-month periods before vs. after checklist implementation. We also analysed outcomes during 9 years that included these periods (July 2004-December 2013). We analysed 9475 patients in the 18-month period before the checklist and 10,589 afterwards. We analysed 57,577 patients who had surgery from 2004 to 2013. Mean number of days alive and out of hospital (95%CI) in the cohort after checklist implementation was 1.0 (0.4-1.6) days longer than in the cohort preceding implementation, p < 0.001. Ninety-day mortality was 395/9475 (4%) and 362/10,589 (3%) in the cohorts before and after checklist implementation, multivariable odds ratio (95%CI) 0.93 (0.80-1.09), p = 0.4. The cohort changes in these outcomes were indistinguishable from longer-term trends in mortality and days alive and out of hospital observed during 9 years, as determined by Bayesian changepoint analysis. Postoperative mortality to 90 days was 228/5686 (4.0%) for Maori and 2047/51,921 (3.9%) for non-Maori, multivariable odds ratio (95%CI) 0.85 (0.73-0.99), p = 0.04. Maori spent on average (95%CI) 1.1 (0.5-1.7) fewer days alive and out of hospital than non-Maori, p < 0.001. In conclusion, our patients experienced improving postoperative outcomes from 2004 to 2013, including the periods before and after implementation of the surgical checklist. Maori patients had worse outcomes than non-Maori.

Haemodynamic profiles of etomidate vs propofol for induction of anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial in patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Etomidate is frequently selected over propofol for induction of anaesthesia because of a putatively favourable haemodynamic profile, but data confirming this perception are limited. METHODS: Patients undergoing cardiac surgery were randomised to induction of anaesthesia with propofol or etomidate. Phase I (n=75) was conducted as open-label, whereas Phase II (n=75) was double blind. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) and boluses of vasopressor administered after induction were recorded. The primary endpoint was the area under the curve below baseline MAP (MAP-time integral) during the 10 min after induction. Secondary endpoints were the use of vasopressors over the same period, and the effect of blinding on the aforementioned endpoints. Groups were compared using regression models with phase and anaesthetist as factors. RESULTS: The mean difference between etomidate and propofol in the MAP-time integral below baseline was 2244 mm Hg s (95% confidence interval, 581-3906; P=0.009), representing a 34% greater reduction with propofol. Overall, vasopressors were used in 10/75 patients in the etomidate group vs 21/75 in the propofol group (P=0.38), and in 20/74 patients during the blinded phase vs 11/76 during the open-label phase (P=0.31). The interaction between randomisation and phase (open-labelled or blinded) was not significant for either primary (P=0.73) or secondary endpoints (P=0.90). CONCLUSIONS: Propofol caused a 34% greater reduction in MAP-time integral from baseline after induction of anaesthesia than etomidate, despite more frequent use of vasopressors with propofol, confirming the superior haemodynamic profile of etomidate in this context. The proportion of patients receiving vasopressors increased slightly, albeit not significantly, in both groups in the blinded phase. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12614000717651.

Acute alcohol intoxication and bispectral index monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Bispectral index (BIS) monitoring is commonly used to decrease the risk of awareness during anaesthesia. We aimed to determine the relationship between blood alcohol concentration and brain function (as measured by BIS) in healthy adults. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, 21 anaesthetic registrars self-regulated alcohol consumption over a 3-h period. Expired alcohol concentration (breathalyser) and BIS measurements were performed hourly for 4 h. A venous blood alcohol sample was taken at the conclusion of the study period. RESULTS: The main outcome measures were the correlation between blood alcohol and brain function as measured by BIS and the change in BIS from baseline (∆BIS) at 4 h. The median number of standard drinks consumed was 9.1 (IQR 7.7-12.3), range 5.4-17. At 4 h, there was a moderate inverse correlation between BIS and blood alcohol (r = -0.49, P = 0.029) and between ∆BIS and blood alcohol (r = -0.46, P =0.043). CONCLUSION: In healthy young adults, we found a moderate correlation between venous blood alcohol concentration and BIS. This suggests that acute alcohol consumption can decrease BIS. This information may be relevant when providing anaesthesia to intoxicated patients who require urgent or time-critical surgery, although certain limitations of this study should be kept in mind.

A prospective, observational study of the effects of implementation strategy on compliance with a surgical safety checklist.

BACKGROUND: The reported benefits of using the WHO Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) are likely to depend on compliance with its correct use. Compliance with SSC administration in centres that have introduced the checklist under a research protocol may differ from centres where the SSC is introduced independently. OBJECTIVE: To compare compliance with SSC administration at an original WHO pilot study centre (Hospital 1) with that at a similar neighbouring hospital (Hospital 2) that independently integrated the SSC with pre-existing practice. METHODS: This was a prospective, observational study. One hundred operations were observed at each hospital. We recorded: compliance with administration of SSC domains (Sign In, Time Out and Sign Out) and individual domain items; timing of domain administration; and operating room team engagement during administration. RESULTS: Domain compliance at Hospital 1 and Hospital 2, respectively, was: 96% and 31% (p<0.0005) for Sign In; 99% and 48% (p<0.0005) for Time Out and 22% and 9% (p=0.008) for Sign Out. Engagement of two or more teams during Sign In and Time Out occurred more frequently at Hospital 2 than at Hospital 1. DISCUSSION: Compliance with administration of SSC domains was lower at Hospital 2 which introduced the SSC outside the context of a strict study protocol. This finding mandates caution in extrapolation of benefits identified in SSC studies to non-study hospitals. Staff engagement was better at Hospital 2 where checklist administration leadership is strategically shared among anaesthetic, surgical and nursing team members as compared with exclusive nursing leadership at Hospital 1. STUDY REGISTRY NUMBER: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: Ref: ACTRN12612000135819, http://www.anzctr.org.au/trial_view.aspx?ID=362007.