Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Improving the rate of surgical normothermia in gynecologic surgery.
Kumar, Amanika; Martin, David P; Dhanorker, Sarah R; Brandt, Sharon R; Schroeder, Darrell R; Hanson, Andrew C; Cima, Robert R; Dowdy, Sean C.
Affiliation
  • Kumar A; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America. Electronic address: Kumar.amanika@mayo.edu.
  • Martin DP; Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
  • Dhanorker SR; Department of Management Engineering and Internal Consulting, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
  • Brandt SR; Department of Anesthesiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
  • Schroeder DR; Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
  • Hanson AC; Division of Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
  • Cima RR; Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
  • Dowdy SC; Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Division of Gynecologic Oncology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, United States of America.
Gynecol Oncol ; 154(3): 590-594, 2019 09.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31285083
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To increase the rate of normothermia (core temperature ≥ 36 °C) in patients undergoing gynecologic surgery.

METHODS:

The rate of surgical normothermia was evaluated in a single institution. A two-phase quality improvement project was undertaken; Phase 1 included the use of intra-operative room temperature regulation and intra-operative patient warming and Phase 2 included pre-operative patient warming. Clinical characteristics, median temperatures, and rate of normothermia were abstracted for patients in each phase. Cohorts were compared using chi-square and t-tests.

RESULTS:

The project was performed in two phases, each with a historic and intervention cohort. There were 503 patients in the historical cohort and 636 patients in the intervention cohort in phase 1; there were 291 patients in the historical cohort and 259 patients in the intervention cohort for Phase 2. Patient characteristics and anesthetic type and duration did not differ between cohorts. After intra-operative temperature regulation and patient warming in Phase 1, significantly more patients achieved normothermia (79% versus 68%, P < 0.0001). However operating room staff were more likely to rate the temperature as very hot in 40% of cases post-intervention, compared to only 2% historically. In Phase 2, after the intervention of pre-warming patients, there was no difference in achieving normothermia, 78% versus 83%, P = 0.09. Staff had no statistical difference in personal comfort with the temperature, however did feel efforts were very effective more frequently, 7.7% historic versus 32.7% post-intervention, P < 0.0001.

CONCLUSIONS:

Quality improvement methodology can be applied to pre- and intra-operative decision making to improve rates of surgical patient normothermia.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Gynecologic Surgical Procedures / Hyperthermia, Induced Type of study: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Language: En Journal: Gynecol Oncol Year: 2019 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Gynecologic Surgical Procedures / Hyperthermia, Induced Type of study: Etiology_studies / Incidence_studies / Observational_studies / Prognostic_studies / Risk_factors_studies Language: En Journal: Gynecol Oncol Year: 2019 Type: Article