Peripheral nerve block anesthesia/analgesia for patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: recommendations from the International Consensus on Anesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery (ICAROS) group based on a systematic review and meta-analysis of current literature.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding the impact of peripheral nerve block (PNB) use in total hip/knee arthroplasty surgery. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis: randomized controlled and observational studies investigating the impact of PNB utilization on major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, thromboembolic, neurologic, infectious, and bleeding complications.Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, were queried from 1946 to August 4, 2020.The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence quality and for the development of recommendations. RESULTS: Analysis of 122 studies revealed that PNB use (compared with no use) was associated with lower ORs for (OR with 95% CIs) for numerous complications (total hip and knee arthroplasties (THA/TKA), respectively): cognitive dysfunction (OR 0.30, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.53/OR 0.52, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.80), respiratory failure (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.74/OR 0.37, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.75), cardiac complications (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93/OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.86), surgical site infections (OR 0.55 95% CI 0.47 to 0.64/OR 0.86 95% CI 0.80 to 0.91), thromboembolism (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.96/OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84 to 0.96) and blood transfusion (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.83 to 0.86/OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.90 to 0.92). CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current body of evidence, the consensus group recommends PNB use in THA/TKA for improved outcomes. RECOMMENDATION: PNB use is recommended for patients undergoing THA and TKA except when contraindications preclude their use. Furthermore, the alignment of provider skills and practice location resources needs to be ensured. Evidence level: moderate; recommendation: strong.

Anaesthetic care of patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: consensus recommendations from the International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) based on a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding anaesthetic practice in hip/knee arthroplasty surgery is needed for improved healthcare outcomes. METHODS: The International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) systematic review, including randomised controlled and observational studies comparing neuraxial to general anaesthesia regarding major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, genitourinary, thromboembolic, neurological, infectious, and bleeding complications. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, from 1946 to May 17, 2018 were queried. Meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was utilised to assess evidence quality and to develop recommendations. RESULTS: The analysis of 94 studies revealed that neuraxial anaesthesia was associated with lower odds or no difference in virtually all reported complications, except for urinary retention. Excerpt of complications for neuraxial vs general anaesthesia in hip/knee arthroplasty, respectively: mortality odds ratio (OR): 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57-0.80/OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.60-1.15; pulmonary OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52-0.80/OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.81; acute renal failure OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.59-0.81/OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.65-0.82; deep venous thrombosis OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.42-0.65/OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93; infections OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.67-0.79/OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.76-0.85; and blood transfusion OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89/OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.82-0.87. CONCLUSIONS: Recommendation: primary neuraxial anaesthesia is preferred for knee arthroplasty, given several positive postoperative outcome benefits; evidence level: low, weak recommendation. RECOMMENDATION: neuraxial anaesthesia is recommended for hip arthroplasty given associated outcome benefits; evidence level: moderate-low, strong recommendation. Based on current evidence, the consensus group recommends neuraxial over general anaesthesia for hip/knee arthroplasty. TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42018099935.

Does Taking the Fellowship In-Service Hematopathology Examination and Performance Relate to Success on the American Board of Pathology Hematology Examination?

OBJECTIVES: The biannual Fellow In-Service Hematopathology Examination (FISHE) assesses knowledge in five content areas. We examined the relationship between taking the FISHE and performance on it with outcomes on the first attempted American Board of Pathology Hematology subspecialty certifying examination (ABP-HE). METHODS: The pass rate between the ABP-HE candidates who took the spring FISHE and those who did not were compared. The likelihood of fellows passing the ABP-HE based on their percentiles on the FISHE was also assessed. RESULTS: ABP-HE candidates who took the spring FISHE had a higher pass rate (96.4%) than those who did not (76.1%, P < .001). Spring FISHE performance, including total percentile and percentiles in four of five FISHE content areas, was only a weak predictor of passing the ABP-HE. CONCLUSIONS: Candidates who take the spring FISHE do better on the ABP-HE than those who do not. Most fellows passed the first attempted ABP-HE regardless of FISHE performance. Whether this is due to fellows making use of the FISHE as a self-evaluation tool to help identify and then correct their knowledge deficiencies remains to be determined.

Factors that influence the selection of sterile glove brand: a randomized controlled trial evaluating the performance and cost of gloves.

PURPOSE: To determine whether glove use modifies tactile and psychomotor performance of health care providers when compared with no glove use and to evaluate factors that influence the selection of sterile glove brand. METHODS: Forty-two anesthesia providers (nine anesthesiologists, seven nurse anesthetists, 20 residents, six student nurse anesthetists) enrolled in and completed this cross-over randomized trial from May 2010 until August 2011. Participants underwent standardized psychomotor testing while wearing five different types of protective gloves. Assessments of psychomotor performance included tactile, fine motor/dexterity, and hand-eye coordination tests. Subjective ratings of glove comfort and performance were reported at the completion of each glove trial. The manufacturer's suggested retail price was collected for each glove tested. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences in touch sensitivity for all nerve distributions, with all glove types resulting in less sensitivity than a bare hand. When compared with the non-sterile glove, only the thickest glove tested (Ansell Perry Orthopaedic) was found to have less touch sensitivity. Fine motor dexterity testing revealed no statistically significant differences in time to completion amongst glove types or bare handed performance. In hand-eye coordination testing across treatment conditions, the thickest glove tested (Ansell Perry(®) Orthopaedic) was the only glove to show a statistically significant difference from a bare hand. There were statistically significant differences in glove comfort ratings across glove types, with latex-free, powder-free (Cardinal Esteem(®)), and latex powder-free (Mölnlycke-Biogel(®)) rated highest; however, there were no statistically significant differences in subjective performance ratings across glove types. CONCLUSIONS: Given the observed similarities in touch sensitivity and psychomotor performance associated with five different glove types, our results suggest that subjective provider preferences, such as glove comfort, should be balanced against material costs.