The importance of differentiating between elective and emergency postoperative critical care patients.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study is to demonstrate the importance of separately analyzing data on elective and emergency surgery patients admitted postoperatively to intensive and intermediate care units. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational study was performed in a tertiary care university hospital to assess the demographic and clinical differences between emergency and elective surgical patients (>14 years old). Group 1 included patients transferred to a floor bed or the ambulatory surgery unit for discharge home after a short stay (<12 hours) in the postanesthesia care unit. Group 2 patients were admitted to the cardiothoracic intensive care unit (ICU), neurosurgical ICU, general ICU, or for an extended intermediate care postanesthesia care unit stay (>12 hours). RESULTS: In groups 1 (n = 1059), there were significant differences between the elective and emergency patients. Emergency, as compared with elective group 2 (n= 1883) patients, experienced more severe preexisting illnesses (ie, had higher American Society of Anesthesiology classifications), underwent different and shorter operations, required prolonged postoperative mechanical ventilation, required longer ICU stays, and had higher mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial differences between elective and emergency surgery patients have important implications when conducting and reporting research on the nature, extent, and outcome of postoperative ICU care.

Who receives postoperative intensive and intermediate care?

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To examine the effects of preoperative and intraoperative factors that determine whether to provide postoperative intensive or intermediate care. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Tertiary-care university hospital. PATIENTS: 3,066 ASA physical status I, II, III, and IV adult patients, 1,233 of whom were transferred to floor or the ambulatory surgery unit after a short postoperative recovery room stay (group 1), whereas the other 1,883 were admitted to intermediate and intensive care areas (group 2). INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS: Demographic and clinical information including preoperative medical history, extent of intraoperative care, and postoperative course were collected. Intraoperative activities were examined with the Operative Complexity Score and the Intraoperative Therapeutic Intensity Score. RESULTS: Almost all patients undergoing complex surgery (cardiac surgery and neurosurgery) received postoperative intermediate or intensive care, even if they had no significant underlying systemic diseases (ASA physical status I and II). Patients with severe underlying diseases (ASA physical status III and IV), but who underwent less extensive surgery, tended to receive intensive and intermediate care. Postoperative mechanical ventilation was associated with receipt of intensive rather than intermediate care. Interestingly, 10% of the elective surgery patients in group 2 unexpectedly received intensive or intermediate care because of intraoperative and immediate postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of postoperative intermediate and intensive care is associated with distinct patterns of preoperative and intraoperative factors.

The Israeli anesthesiology physician workforce.

BACKGROUND: Anesthesiology is a vital specialty that permits the safe and humane performance of painful procedures. Most Israeli anesthesiologists are immigrants, while only a minimal number of Israeli medical school graduates enter the specialty. Unfortunately, the supply of immigrant physicians is declining due to falling immigration rates. OBJECTIVES: To examine the current Israeli anesthesiology workforce and project future needs. METHODS: Demographic and professional information about Israeli hospital anesthesiologists was solicited from anesthesiology department heads. Data were also gathered about the past, present and projected future growth, age distribution and birth rate of the Israeli population. Needs and demand-based analyses were used to project future anesthesiology workforce requirements. RESULTS: Data on 711 anesthesiologists were obtained from 30 hospital anesthesiology department heads. Eighty-seven anesthesiologists (12.2%) graduated from Israeli medical schools and 459 (64.6%) graduated from medical schools in the former Soviet Union. Among the 154 anesthesiology residents < or = 40 years old, only 13 (8.4%) graduated from Israeli medical schools. There are approximately 10.8 anesthesiologists per 100,000 population. Projections for 2005-2015 revealed a need for 250-300 new anesthesiologists. CONCLUSIONS: The anesthesiology workforce is predominantly composed of immigrants. This has vast implications for the future viability of the specialty because of the continuing reduction in immigration, the lack of interest in the specialty by Israeli medical school graduates, and the projected need for many new anesthesiologists to replace retirees and to provide care to a growing and aging population.

Evaluating intraoperative therapeutic and diagnostic interventions.

UNLABELLED: A cost-conscious health care system requires detailed measures of its activities, including measurements of care provided to perioperative patients. Because there are no scoring systems that quantify the extent of intraoperative care interventions, we developed an intraoperative therapeutic intensity score (I-TIS). Physiological/biochemical monitoring and therapeutic interventions were assigned one to four points on the basis of the resource utilization and/or intensity of care they each reflect. Scoring was performed on actual patients, and the results were compared with ASA classification and surgical complexity. A 78-item scoring system was developed and assessed by using two patient groups. Group 1 (n = 307) entered the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) for short postoperative stays and had an I-TIS of 7.3 +/- 5.0; Group 2 patients (n = 443) were either admitted to the surgical, cardiothoracic, or neurosurgical intensive care units or had extended PACU stays, and they had an I-TIS of 25.2 +/- 12.4 (P < 0.001 versus Group 1). The correlation of I-TIS with the surgical complexity classification was r = 0.77, with ASA base relative value units was r(s) = 0.75, and with the ASA physical status classification was r(s) = 0.49. The score correlated well with surgical complexity and was able to differentiate between the intensity of care during various surgical procedures. IMPLICATIONS: A scoring system to quantify the extent of nonsurgical intraoperative care was developed. The scoring system was validated and correlated well with surgical complexity; it was able to differentiate between the intensity of care provided during various surgical procedures.