Fewer Wrong-Site Peripheral Nerve Blocks Following Updates to Anesthesia Time-Out Policy.

Background: Peripheral nerve block (PNB) has been shown to be safe and effective, and its use has continued to increase, but it is not without risks. One potentially preventable risk is wrong-site blocks (WSBs). Our institution mandated a time-out process before PNB in 2003, and then in 2007 made two more changes to our policy to mitigate risk: (1) the circulating/block nurse was the only person permitted to access the block needles; after a time-out period was complete, the nurse gave the needles to the anesthesiologist; and (2) the nurse remained at the patient's bedside until the PNB was initiated. Purpose: We sought to compare the incidence of WSBs before and after this time-out process was implemented in 2003 and the enhanced form of it was implemented in 2007. We hypothesized that the enhanced process would decrease the incidence of WSBs. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed data, from January 2003 to December 2016, taken from the quality assurance and performance improvement (QA/PI) division of the anesthesiology department at our institution, which maintained daily statistics on anesthetic types using quality audits from paper or electronic anesthesia records. All WSBs from this period were reported to the QA/PI division and root cause analyses performed. The incidence of WSB was compared pre- and post-implementation of the enhanced time-out policy for upper extremity, lower extremity, and all blocks by calculating relative risks with 95% score confidence intervals and performing Fisher's exact tests. Results: The incidence of WSBs decreased from 1.10/10,000 before changes to the policy were initiated to 0.24/10,000 afterward. Conclusion: We observed an association between the implementation of a dynamic, team-focused time-out process and a reduction in the incidence of WSBs at our institution. A causal effect of the enhanced time-out cannot be determined given the risk of bias associated with before-after study designs and our lack of adjustment for potential confounders. Further research is therefore warranted.

Post-Dural Puncture Headache is Uncommon in Young Ambulatory Surgery Patients.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) arising from spinal anesthesia in the general population is low. However, patients under 45 years have been shown to exhibit a higher incidence of PDPH, even with small needles. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: This study aimed to estimate the incidence of PDPH from a 27G pencil-point needle in ambulatory surgery patients between the ages of 15-45 years and compare incidence of PDPH by age group, sex, and history of headache. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study, 300 patients (15-45 years old) who underwent simple knee arthroscopy under spinal anesthesia with a 27G pencil-point needle were enrolled. Verbal consent was obtained during the initial phone conversation between post-operative days (PODs) 2-5. A PDPH questionnaire was administered during this conversation and between PODs 7-10. Patients who reported a positional headache were contacted by a physician co-investigator, who determined PDPH diagnosis. RESULTS: Five patients were excluded from analysis due to complicated operative procedures or spinal needle size. The overall PDPH incidence was 2.0% (95% CI 0.9-4.4; 6/295). PDPH incidence in 15-19-year-old patients was 16.7% (95% CI 4.7-44.8; 2/12). The crude relative risk of PDPH was 15.4 (95% CI 2.8-114.4) for patients with and without history of headache and 2.5 (95% CI 0.5-14.8) for females vs. males. Overall, 16.3% (95% CI 12.5-20.9) of patients reported post-operative, non-positional headaches. CONCLUSIONS: There was a low overall incidence of PDPH among patients aged 15-45. Pre-planned subgroup analyses of PDPH incidence by age group revealed a high risk of PDPH among a small sample of 15-19-year-olds.

Stroke, regional anesthesia in the sitting position, and hypotension: a review of 4169 ambulatory surgery patients.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Intraoperative hypotension is used to reduce surgical bleeding. Case reports of stroke after general anesthesia in the sitting position led us to collect data (patient demographics, medical risk factors for stroke, intraoperative hemodynamics) about the incidence of stroke after surgery in the sitting position. METHODS: This study reviewed 4169 (3000 retrospective, 1169 prospective) ambulatory shoulder surgeries in the sitting position. For the prospective cohort, patients were queried postoperatively regarding stroke, with corroboration from 4 databases (anesthesia department quality assurance, hospital case management, state-reportable events, and hospital information system diagnostic code databases). For the retrospective cohort, rate of stroke was determined via the same 4 databases. RESULTS: No patient had a stroke (95% confidence interval, 0%-0.07%). Risk factors for perioperative stroke were present in 40% of patients. Brachial plexus nerve block with intravenous sedation was used for 95.7% (retrospective) and 99.8% (prospective) of the cohorts. Many patients (47%) experienced intraoperative hypotension by at least one definition: 40% (retrospective) and 30% (prospective) had at least a 30% decrease in mean arterial pressure; 27% (retrospective) and 24% (prospective) had a mean pressure less than 66 mm Hg; and 13% (retrospective) and 12% (prospective) had a systolic blood pressure of less than 90 mm Hg. CONCLUSIONS: No strokes were observed in 4169 patients. The estimated upper limit of the 95% confidence interval for stroke after regional anesthesia for shoulder surgery in the seated position is 0.07%, despite frequent incidence of hypotension.

One-year experience with day-of-surgery pregnancy testing before elective orthopedic procedures.

BACKGROUND: Elective surgery is generally postponed in pregnancy. A policy of testing for urine human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in all women of childbearing age on the day of surgery was initiated at an elective orthopedic surgery facility. This is a retrospective report of our 1 yr experience and the associated costs. METHODS: Records were reviewed from January 3, 2005, through January 2, 2006, to determine the number of urine hCG tests performed, and the disposition of all patients with a positive result. Costs were calculated using the charges for testing supplies and laboratory labor. RESULTS: During the first year of policy implementation, 2588 of 2595 women of childbearing age underwent urine hCG testing. Five patients had a positive result, and surgery was cancelled. Of these five, three were previously unrecognized pregnancies, one an unrecognized asymptomatic ectopic pregnancy, and one a false-positive result in a perimenopausal woman. Three other women had a "weak positive" urine result, followed by a negative serum hCG. Surgery proceeded in all three. The calculated cost was $5.03 per urine test, and $3273 for each true positive result. CONCLUSIONS: A policy of routinely performing urine hCG pregnancy tests in women of childbearing age on the day of surgery was effective in detecting unrecognized pregnancy. This resulted in a postponement of elective surgery in all cases. Of 2588 women tested, one had surgery postponed because of a false-positive result. The cost of $3273 per true positive test must be compared with the benefit.

A new approach to preanesthetic site verification after 2 cases of wrong site peripheral nerve blocks.

OBJECTIVE: We discuss the importance of a "preanesthetic site verification" and highlight 2 significant modifications to a policy developed at our institution in 2003. CASE REPORT: The report describes 2 cases of wrong site peripheral nerve blocks that initiated protocol amendments to address shortcomings of the original policy. Two specific limitations were identified to improve upon. First, the practitioner must not overlook the site verification as it is essential prior to every block. Second, time delays between the verification and block performance should be minimized. CONCLUSIONS: The "preanesthetic site verification" is an integral part of preventing wrong site block and surgery. To ensure that it is carried out before every peripheral nerve block, a unique multidisciplinary approach was adopted in which the block needles were removed from anesthesia carts and transferred to a separate container in the area of the circulating nurse. The anesthesiologist must now request a block needle from the circulating nurse immediately prior to block performance and confirm the site at that time. This safety process emulates the presurgical site verification that takes place before a scalpel is passed to a surgeon. Furthermore, the circulating nurse must remain at the bedside until block initiation to make sure that delays between site verification and block performance do not impinge on correct site placement.

Two cases of a wrong-site peripheral nerve block and a process to prevent this complication.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a system to prevent laterality errors while performing peripheral nerve blockade. CASE REPORT: The report depicts 2 cases of peripheral nerve blocks being performed on the wrong (nonoperative) extremity. An analysis of the circumstances in each case reveals distractions, schedule changes, and communication breakdown, which contributed to the error. A protocol to prevent these errors from occurring in the future, based on the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations guidelines, to eliminate "wrong-site" surgical procedures is developed and discussed. CONCLUSIONS: The anesthesiologist plays an important role in preventing wrong-site peripheral nerve blockade and surgery. The protocol developed for "Pre-Anesthetic Site Verification" as a supplement to our preoperative site verification policy is invaluable in preventing wrong-site anesthesia and surgery.