[Preoperative evaluation of adult patients before elective, non-cardiothoracic surgery : A joint recommendation of the German Society for Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, the German Society for Surgery and the German Society for Internal Medicine]. / Präoperative Evaluation erwachsener Patientinnen und Patienten vor elektiven, nicht herz-thoraxchirurgischen Eingriffen : Eine gemeinsame Empfehlung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und Intensivmedizin, der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Chirurgie und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Innere Medizin.

The 70 recommendations summarize the current status of preoperative risk evaluation of adult patients prior to elective non-cardiothoracic surgery. Based on the joint publications of the German scientific societies for anesthesiology and intensive care medicine (DGAI), surgery (DGCH), and internal medicine (DGIM), which were first published in 2010 and updated in 2017, as well as the European guideline on preoperative cardiac risk evaluation published in 2022, a comprehensive re-evaluation of the recommendation takes place, taking into account new findings, the current literature, and current guidelines of international professional societies. The revised multidisciplinary recommendation is intended to facilitate a structured and common approach to the preoperative evaluation of patients. The aim is to ensure individualized preparation for the patient prior to surgery and thus to increase patient safety. Taking into account intervention- and patient-specific factors, which are indispensable in the preoperative risk evaluation, the perioperative risk for the patient should be minimized and safety increased. The recommendations for action are summarized under "General Principles (A)," "Advanced Diagnostics (B)," and the "Preoperative Management of Continuous Medication (C)." For the first time, a rating of the individual measures with regard to their clinical relevance has been given in the present recommendation. A joint and transparent agreement is intended to ensure a high level of patient orientation while avoiding unnecessary preliminary examinations, to shorten preoperative examination procedures, and ultimately to save costs. The joint recommendation of DGAI, DGCH and DGIM reflects the current state of knowledge as well as the opinion of experts. The recommendation does not replace the individualized decision between patient and physician about the best preoperative strategy and treatment.

A New Distal Pharyngeal Airway Device Associated with a Reduced Need for Chin-Lift and Jaw-Thrust Maneuvers in Sedated Patients.

Oropharyngeal airways (OPA) or nasopharyngeal airways (NPA) sometimes require chin-lift or jaw-thrust (CLJT) maneuvers to relieve airway obstruction which creates the burden of continuous hands-on care by the anesthesia provider. A new distal pharyngeal airway device (DPA) was used on 63 successive ambulatory surgery patients to assess the frequency of patients requiring manual CLJT maneuvers to prevent airway obstruction. Results were then compared with a contemporaneous group of patients who had used OPA or NPA devices for similar procedures. Patients using the DPA had a 38.5% lower rate of CLJT maneuvers compared with the combined OPA/NPA groups (22.2% of 63 vs. 60.7% of 163, P ≤ .001). Moreover, the results for the DPA group were close to those of the natural airway group (22.2% of 62 vs. 24.8% of 233, P = .66) Results were similar for a sub-set of the above groups who required deep sedation or deep extubation. CLJT maneuvers were common in this ambulatory surgery setting. The new DPA device was associated with a reduced need for such manual maneuvers when compared with similar patients who received OPA or NPA devices and is comparable with the rate for natural airways.

Interdisciplinary Simulation Courses to Train Residents on Communication of Unexpected Complications from Perioperative Care: A Randomized Comparison of Within-Event (Microdebriefing) and Postscenario Debriefing.

INTRODUCTION: Training to disclose bad news in a pluridisciplinary format facilitates communication and improves learning. There are many different debriefing methods described in the literature. The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the value of final debriefing and microdebriefing with interruptions of the scenario in a simulation program about communication in unexpected complications from perioperative care. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, single center study between October 2018 and July 2019 in a simulation center. Three scenarios were related to patient or family disclosure of complications which had occurred during gynecologic surgery by a dyad involving 2 residents (a gynecology and an anesthesia resident). All sessions involved 6 residents (3 gynecologist and 3 anesthesiologist). The main outcome measure was the immediate residents' self-assessment of the impact of the course on their medical practice immediately after the session. RESULTS: We performed 15 simulation sessions including 80 residents. Thirty-nine residents were included in final debriefing group and 41 in micro-debriefing group. There was no significant difference on the impact for medical practice between groups (9.3/10 in the micro-debriefing group versus 9.2 in the final debriefing group (p = 0.53)). The overall satisfaction was high in the 2 group (9.1/10 in the 2 groups). CONCLUSION: This study is the first one to compare two debriefing methods in case of breaking bad news simulation. No difference between the 2 techniques was found concerning the students' feelings and short and long-term improvement of their communication skills.

The movement of syringes and medication during anesthesiology delivery: An observational study in laparoscopic surgeries.

The movements of syringes and medications during an anesthetic case have yet to be systematically documented. We examine how syringes and medication move through the anesthesia work area during a case. We conducted a video-based observational study of 14 laparoscopic surgeries. We defined 'syringe events' as when syringe was picked up and moved. Medications were administered to the patient in only 48 (23.6%) of the 203 medication or syringe events. On average, 14.5 syringe movements occurred in each case. We estimate approximately 4.2 syringe movements for each medication administration. When a medication was administered to the patient (either through the IV pump or the patient port), it was picked up from one of 8 locations in the work area. Our study suggests that the syringe storage locations vary and include irregular locations (e.g., patient bed or provider's pockets). Our study contributes to understanding the complexity in the anesthesia work practices.

Opioid-free anesthesia: a practical guide for teaching and implementation.

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) represents an innovative approach that prioritizes patient safety, reduces the risks associated with opioid use, and seeks to enhance recovery. Few descriptions regarding the practical and implementation aspects exist. This review serves as a practical guide on OFA teaching and application. We briefly discuss the historical use of opioids in anesthesia, side effects and their consequences. We discuss pedagogical avenues and challenges, as well as implementation of OFA in less experienced settings. Opioid use in anesthesia originally coexisted with OFA. During the last decades, the advent of multimodal analgesia has resulted in decreased opioid dosages both before and after surgery. Recently, OFA increased in popularity, supported by meta-analyses, due to reduced nausea and vomiting, with a potential, even if limited, impact on pain. OFA, as part of rational prescribing, may contribute to a more patient-centered approach. Different strategies for OFA implementation coexist. Educational aspects, leadership, guidelines, local guidance, and training are all important. We propose a framework for OFA implementation with concrete options, including patient preparation, choice of OFA pharmacological agents (according to type of surgery and patient), and postoperative care. Whilst opioids still have an important place in pain management, they have brought harms that we cannot ignore. Evidence for using opioid-sparing and OFA techniques continues to emerge and there is a need to personalize more approaches. In this review, we provide evidence-based, relatively simple methods that can be used in implementing and delivering OFA.

Advances in pediatric perioperative care using artificial intelligence.

PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW: This article explores how artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to evaluate risks in pediatric perioperative care. It will also describe potential future applications of AI, such as models for airway device selection, controlling anesthetic depth and nociception during surgery, and contributing to the training of pediatric anesthesia providers. RECENT FINDINGS: The use of AI in healthcare has increased in recent years, largely due to the accessibility of large datasets, such as those gathered from electronic health records. Although there has been less focus on pediatric anesthesia compared to adult anesthesia, research is on- going, especially for applications focused on risk factor identification for adverse perioperative events. Despite these advances, the lack of formal external validation or feasibility testing results in uncertainty surrounding the clinical applicability of these tools. SUMMARY: The goal of using AI in pediatric anesthesia is to assist clinicians in providing safe and efficient care. Given that children are a vulnerable population, it is crucial to ensure that both clinicians and families have confidence in the clinical tools used to inform medical decision- making. While not yet a reality, the eventual incorporation of AI-based tools holds great potential to contribute to the safe and efficient care of our patients.

Enhancing Drug Management, Cost Savings, and Staff Satisfaction in Anesthesiology: A Quality Improvement Project in a Chinese Tertiary Hospital.

INTRODUCTION: In alignment with China's national directive for improved drug management in anesthesiology, the Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University initiated a quality improvement project, aiming to tackle the prevailing challenges of inefficiencies in drug administration, escalating drug costs, and the notable communication gap between pharmacists and anesthesiologists. METHODS: We employed a Plan-Do-Study-Act methodology to establish a pharmacy team and execute a multidimensional pharmaceutical intervention. The interventions included the formulation of standard procedures, guidelines and regulations, assistance from an information system (including automatic dispensing cabinets and prospective prescription review system), communication feedback (via WeChat groups), and education for anesthesiology staff. The intervention spanned from April to September 2023, focusing on optimizing medication management, achieving cost savings, and enhancing the satisfaction of anesthesia team members, with an additional observation from October to December 2023. RESULTS: Following the interventions, improvements were observed in drug management practices. These enhancements included increased compliance with accounting procedures, more rigorous registration of controlled substances, and more effective disposal of liquid residues. There was no adverse events related to high-alert medications or look-alike drug usage errors. The introduction of automatic dispensing cabinets and a prospective prescription review system markedly improved work efficiency. The utilization of a WeChat group facilitated effective communication about unreasonable prescriptions and drug-related issues. Among the 29,061 patients who underwent surgery both before and after the interventions, significant reductions were observed both in the drug proportion and the per capita drug costs (P = 0.03, P = 0.014, respectively). The per capita drug cost decreased by 20.82%, from ¥723.43 to ¥572.78, consistently remaining below ¥600 throughout the 9-month observation period. The per capita cost of monitoring drugs including dezocine, butorphanol, haemocoagulase agkistrodon, penehyclidine, and ulinastatin experienced a significant reduction (P < 0.05). Additionally, in the satisfaction questionnaires returned, a remarkable 94.44% of anesthesiology staff expressed high satisfaction with the comprehensive pharmaceutical interventions. CONCLUSION: The quality improvement project has yielded remarkable positive outcomes, serving as a model worthy of reference and replication in similar healthcare settings.

Effect of a non-reactive absorbent with or without environmentally oriented electronic feedback on anesthesia provider's fresh gas flow rates: A greening initiative.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To examine the effects of a non-reactive carbon dioxide absorbent (AMSORB® Plus) versus a traditional carbon dioxide absorbent (Medisorb™) on the FGF used by anesthesia providers and an electronic educational feedback intervention using Carestation™ Insights (GE HealthCare) on provider-specific change in FGF. DESIGN: Prospective, single-center cohort study set in a greening initiative. SETTING: Operating room. PARTICIPANTS: 157 anesthesia providers (i.e., anesthesiology trainees, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and solo anesthesiologists). INTERVENTIONS: Intervention #1 was the introduction of AMSORB® Plus into 8 Aisys CS2, Carestation™ Insights-enabled anesthesia machines (GE HealthCare) at the study site. At the end of week 6, anesthesia providers were educated and given an environmentally oriented electronic feedback strategy for the next 12 weeks of the study (Intervention #2) using Carestation™ Insights data. MEASUREMENTS: The dual primary outcomes were the difference in average daily FGF during maintenance anesthesia between machines assigned to AMSORB® Plus versus Medisorb™ and the provider-specific change in average fresh gas flows after 12 weeks of feedback and education compared to the historical data. MAIN RESULTS: Over the 18-week period, there were 1577 inhaled anesthetics performed in the 8 operating rooms (528 for intervention 1, 1049 for intervention 2). There were 1001 provider days using Aisys CS2 machines and 7452 provider days of historical data from the preceding year. Overall, AMSORB® Plus was not associated with significantly less FGF (mean - 80 ml/min, 97.5% confidence interval - 206 to 46, P = .15). The environmentally oriented electronic feedback intervention was not associated with a significant decrease in provider-specific mean FGF (-112 ml/min, 97.5% confidence interval - 244 to 21, P = .059). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that introducing a non-reactive absorbent did not significantly alter FGF. Using environmentally oriented electronic feedback relying on data analytics did not result in significantly reduced provider-specific FGF.

Predictors of Substance Use Risk in Nurse Anesthetists.

BACKGROUND: Certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) are exposed daily to highly addictive substances and stressful work environments, placing them at risk for substance use disorders (SUDs). Previous research, which is scarce, indicated that drugs of choice were opioids and propofol. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate predictors of SUD risk using the World Health Organization Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test. METHOD: From June to July 2020, an online survey was sent via the American Association of Nurse Anesthesiology Research Survey Service to 3,000 CRNAs with a response of approximately 225 members. RESULTS: CRNAs were found to be at a moderate risk for SUDs in the following categories: 10.27% for tobacco, 23.56% for alcohol, and 6.28% for cannabis. Regression analysis by substance category includes robust, differing models in this homogeneous sample. Predictors for all three models include a collection of demographic variables, religiosity, anxiety, difficulties due to anxiety, depression, substance use history, contact with the American Association of Nurse Anesthesiology Peer Assistance Program, and organizational support. CONCLUSION: Over 10% of CRNAs are at risk for developing tobacco use disorder, and almost one quarter of those surveyed are at a moderate risk for developing alcohol use disorder. These data are of concern and may indicate a shift of preferred substances used by CRNAs from controlled substances to alcohol.

Use of the Schelin Catheter for transurethral intraprostatic anesthesia prior to Rezum treatment.

Minimally invasive surgery techniques (MIST) have become newly adopted in urological care.  Given this, new analgesic techniques are important in optimizing patient outcomes and resource management. Rezum treatment (RT) for BPH has emerged as a new MIST with excellent patient outcomes, including improving quality of life (QoL) and International Prostate Symptom Scores (IPSSs), while also preserving sexual function.  Currently, the standard analgesic approach for RT involves a peri-prostatic nerve block (PNB) using a transrectal ultrasound (TRUS) or systemic sedation anesthesia.  The TRUS approach is invasive, uncomfortable, and holds a risk of infection.  Additionally, alternative methods such as, inhaled methoxyflurane (Penthrox), nitric oxide, general anesthesia, as well as intravenous (IV) sedation pose safety risks or mandate the presence of an anesthesiology team.  Transurethral intraprostatic anesthesia (TUIA) using the Schelin Catheter (ProstaLund, Lund, Sweden) (SC) provides a new, non-invasive, and efficient technique for out-patient, office based Rezum procedures.  Through local administration of an analgesic around the prostate base, the SC has been shown to reduce pain, procedure times, and bleeding during MISTs.  Herein, we evaluated the analgesic efficacy of TUIA via the SC in a cohort of 10 patients undergoing in-patient RT for BPH.

The impact of a medically directed student registered nurse anesthesia staffing model on Postprocedural patient outcomes.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: In 2018, the American Society of Anesthesiologists stated that student registered nurse anesthetists (SRNAs) "are not yet fully qualified anesthesia personnel." It remains unclear, however, whether postprocedural outcomes are affected by SRNAs providing anesthesia care under the medical direction of anesthesiologists, as compared with medically directed anesthesiology fellows or residents, or certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs). We therefore aimed to examine whether medically directed SRNAs serving as in-room anesthesia providers impact surgical outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective, matched-cohort analysis. SETTING: Adult patients (≥18 years old) undergoing inpatient surgery between 2000 and 2017 at a tertiary academic medical center. PATIENTS: 15,365 patients exclusively cared for by medically directed SRNAs were matched to 15,365 cared for by medically directed CRNAs, anesthesiology residents, and/or fellows. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: The primary composite outcome was postoperative occurrence of in-hospital mortality and six categories of major morbidities (infectious, bleeding, serious cardiac, gastrointestinal, respiratory, and urinary complications). In-hospital mortality was analyzed as the secondary outcome. MAIN RESULTS: In all, 30,730 cases were matched using propensity score matching to control for potential confounding. The primary outcome was identified in 2295 (7.5%) cases (7.5% with exclusive medically directed SRNAs vs 7.4% with medically directed CRNAs, residents and/or fellows; relative risk, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.11). Thus, our effort to determine noninferiority (10% difference in relative risk) with other providers was inconclusive (P = .07). However, the medically directed SRNA group (0.8% [118]) was found to be noninferior (P < .001) to the matched group (1.0% [156]) on in-hospital mortality (relative risk, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.59-0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Among 30,730 patients undergoing inpatient surgery at a single hospital, findings were inconclusive regarding whether exclusive medically directed SRNAs as in-room providers were noninferior to other providers. The use of medically directed SRNAs under this staffing model should be subject to further review. Clinical Trial and Registry URL: Not applicable.

Changes in Gender and Racial/Ethnic Diversity in US Residency Program Applications From 2018 to 2022.

Background Residency application patterns by gender and race/ethnicity offer important insights about diversity in residency recruitment. It is unknown how the COVID-19 pandemic and virtual interviewing affected these patterns. Objective We hypothesized that the introduction of virtual interviews caused an increase in applications submitted per applicant and that there may be differences by gender and race/ethnicity. Methods We extracted publicly reported Electronic Residency Application Service application data from 2018 to 2022 for 14 residency specialties with 1000 or more applicants in 2022 by self-reported gender and underrepresented in medicine (UIM) status. We compared patterns before and after virtual interviews were introduced in 2021. Results Among 401 480 residency applicants, the average number of applications submitted per applicant increased for all specialties between 2018 and 2022 across gender and race/ethnicity. Across all years, women applied to more programs than men in 5 specialties (dermatology, neurology, obstetrics/gynecology, pediatrics, and surgery), whereas men applied to more programs than women in 3 (anesthesia, family medicine, and physical medicine and rehabilitation). Across all years, non-UIM applicants applied to more programs than UIM applicants in all 14 specialties. There were no clear changes in application patterns by gender and race/ethnicity during in-person versus virtual interview years. Conclusions The average number of applications submitted per applicant increased over time across gender and race/ethnicity. In some specialties, women applied to more programs than men, and in others vice-versa, whereas non-UIM applicants applied to more programs than UIM applicants in all specialties. Virtual interviews did not change these patterns.

Does preoperative multidisciplinary team assessment of high-risk patients improve the safety and outcomes of patients undergoing surgery?

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend preoperative multidisciplinary team (MDT) assessment for high-risk surgical patients. Preoperative MDT meetings can help to improve surgical care, but there is little evidence on whether they improve patient outcomes. METHODS: This paper aims to share our experience of MDT meetings for high-risk surgical patients to underline their added value to the current standard of care. An observational study of a retrospective cohort of preoperative high-risk MDT meetings of a tertiary referral hospital between January 2015 and December 2020. For 249 patients the outcomes preoperative data, MDT decisions, and patient outcomes were collected from electronic health records. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 249 patients were discussed at high-risk MDT meetings. Most of the patients (97%) were assessed as having an American Society of Anesthesiology score ≥ 3, and 219 (88%) had a European Society of Cardiology and European Society of Anaesthesiology risk score of intermediate or high. After MDT assessment, 154 (62%) were directly approved for surgery, and 39 (16%) were considered ineligible for surgery. The remaining 56 (23%) patients underwent additional assessments before reconsideration at a high-risk MDT meeting. The main reason for patients being discussed at the high-risk MDT meeting was to assess the risk-benefit ratio of surgery. Ultimately, 184 (74%) patients underwent surgery. Of the operated patients, 122 (66%) did not have a major complication in the postoperative period, and 149 patients (81%) were alive after one year. CONCLUSIONS: This cohort study shows the vulnerability and complexity of high-risk patients but also shows that the use of an MDT assessment contributes too improved peri- and postoperative treatment strategies in high-risk patients. Most patients underwent surgery after careful risk assessment and, if deemed necessary, preoperative and perioperative treatment optimization to reduce their risk.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Perioperative Health Care Among Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: JACC State-of-the-Art Review.

There has been little progress in reducing health care disparities since the 2003 landmark Institute of Medicine's report Unequal Treatment. Despite the higher burden of cardiovascular disease in underrepresented racial and ethnic groups, they have less access to cardiologists and cardiothoracic surgeons, and have higher rates of morbidity and mortality with cardiac surgical interventions. This review summarizes existing literature and highlights disparities in cardiovascular perioperative health care. We propose actionable solutions utilizing multidisciplinary perspectives from cardiology, cardiac surgery, cardiothoracic anesthesiology, critical care, medical ethics, and health disparity experts. Applying a health equity lens to multipronged interventions is necessary to eliminate the disparities in perioperative health care among patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Heterogeneity Among Countries in the Subspecialty of Cardiovascular Anesthesia in Latin America: Survey Results.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate demographics, workload, training, facilities, and equipment in cardiovascular anesthesia (CVA) in Latin America (LA). DESIGN: A descriptive cross-sectional study with data collected through a survey. SETTING: A multicenter, international web-based questionnaire that included 37 multiple-choice questions. PARTICIPANTS: Physicians and specialists in anesthesiology who regularly participated in cardiovascular surgeries and were members of the scientific societies of the Latin American Confederation of Anesthesiology. INTERVENTIONS: None MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 484 completed questionnaires were collected. A total of 97.8% of the respondents had a university degree in anesthesiology. Most did not receive formal training in CVA, and only 41.5% received formal training. Moreover, most of them were trained in their own country, and a smaller percentage were trained abroad. Half of the respondents reported receiving <12 months of training. A third part of the respondents had received training in transesophageal echocardiography. Only 5.8% of the respondents worked exclusively in CVA, and a high percentage dedicated <60% of their weekly work hours to this subspecialty. A total of 80.6% of the centers had <3 cardiac surgery operating rooms. Only one-third of the centers performed heart/lung transplantation, venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and ventricular assist device implantation. CONCLUSIONS: A significant lack of training programs in anesthesiology practice and complex procedures in medical centers in LA are evident. Thus, basic accredited programs should be developed in medical centers in LA.

Anesthesia Liability Related to Pre-existing Conditions.

In 1985, the American Society of Anesthesiologists initiated a quality improvement closed claims analysis project for anesthetic injury to elevate patient safety. To date, there have been a total of 8954 documented claims, describing injuries contracted under sedation, regional anesthesia, or failure to attend to a patient's post-operative needs. The Closed Claims database reveals that the most highly documented health care complications were a loss of life at 2%, nerve injuries at 2%, and damage to the brain at 9%. The highest documented cases of damage from anesthesia involved regional-block-related events at 20%, followed by respiratory-related adverse effects at 17%, cardiovascular-related events at 13%, together with apparatus-linked events at 10%. Injury may result from several causes. First, multiple techniques and interventions are used during surgery, and all have potential adverse effects. Additionally, many patients scheduled for surgery have extensive past medical histories and medical comorbidities, thereby increasing their baseline risk for injury. From the Closed Claims database, improved evaluation of clinical-related implications linked to injuries within the handling of airway, sedation, non-operational room locales, obstetric anesthesia, along with chronic pain management. In summary, anesthesia departments should review outcomes of their patients on a routine basis. Assessing factors when an adverse outcome occurs may allow for changes in techniques or other anesthesia considerations to help lessen or prevent future complications.

Social Determinants of Health and Preoperative Care.

Preoperative care exists as part of perioperative continuum during which anesthesiologists and surgeons optimize patients for surgery. These multispecialty efforts are important, particularly for patients with complex medical histories and those requiring major surgery. Preoperative care improves planning and determines the clinical pathway and discharge disposition. The role of nonmedical social factors in the preoperative planning is not well described in anesthesiology. Research to improve outcomes based on social factors is not well described for anesthesiologists but could be instrumental in decreasing disparities and advancing health equity in surgical patients.