Crisis management during anaesthesia: the development of an anaesthetic crisis management manual.

BACKGROUND: All anaesthetists have to handle life threatening crises with little or no warning. However, some cognitive strategies and work practices that are appropriate for speed and efficiency under normal circumstances may become maladaptive in a crisis. It was judged in a previous study that the use of a structured "core" algorithm (based on the mnemonic COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK) would diagnose and correct the problem in 60% of cases and provide a functional diagnosis in virtually all of the remaining 40%. It was recommended that specific sub-algorithms be developed for managing the problems underlying the remaining 40% of crises and assembled in an easy-to-use manual. Sub-algorithms were therefore developed for these problems so that they could be checked for applicability and validity against the first 4000 anaesthesia incidents reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS). METHODS: The need for 24 specific sub-algorithms was identified. Teams of practising anaesthetists were assembled and sets of incidents relevant to each sub-algorithm were identified from the first 4000 reported to AIMS. Based largely on successful strategies identified in these reports, a set of 24 specific sub-algorithms was developed for trial against the 4000 AIMS reports and assembled into an easy-to-use manual. A process was developed for applying each component of the core algorithm COVER at one of four levels (scan-check-alert/ready-emergency) according to the degree of perceived urgency, and incorporated into the manual. The manual was disseminated at a World Congress and feedback was obtained. RESULTS: Each of the 24 specific crisis management sub-algorithms was tested against the relevant incidents among the first 4000 reported to AIMS and compared with the actual management by the anaesthetist at the time. It was judged that, if the core algorithm had been correctly applied, the appropriate sub-algorithm would have been resolved better and/or faster in one in eight of all incidents, and would have been unlikely to have caused harm to any patient. The descriptions of the validation of each of the 24 sub-algorithms constitute the remaining 24 papers in this set. Feedback from five meetings each attended by 60-100 anaesthetists was then collated and is included. CONCLUSION: The 24 sub-algorithms developed form the basis for developing a rational evidence-based approach to crisis management during anaesthesia. The COVER component has been found to be satisfactory in real life resuscitation situations and the sub-algorithms have been used successfully for several years. It would now be desirable for carefully designed simulator based studies, using naive trainees at the start of their training, to systematically examine the merits and demerits of various aspects of the sub-algorithms. It would seem prudent that these sub-algorithms be regarded, for the moment, as decision aids to support and back up clinicians' natural responses to a crisis when all is not progressing as expected.

Crisis management during anaesthesia: hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Hypertension occurs commonly during anaesthesia and is usually promptly and appropriately treated by anaesthetists. However, its recognition is dependent on correctly functioning and calibrated monitors. If it is not diagnosed and/or promptly corrected, it has the potential to cause significant morbidity and even mortality. OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of a previously described core algorithm "COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK" supplemented by a specific sub-algorithm for the management of hypertension occurring in association with anaesthesia. METHODS: The potential performance of this approach for each of the relevant incidents among the first 4000 reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS) was compared with the actual management as reported by the anaesthetists involved. RESULTS: There were 70 reports of intraoperative hypertension among the first 4000 incidents reported to AIMS. Drug related causes accounted for 59% of all incidents. It was considered that, properly applied, this structured approach would have led to a quicker and/or better resolution of the problem in 21% of the cases. CONCLUSION: Once hypertension is identified and confirmed, its rapid control by the careful use of a volatile anaesthetic agent, intravenous opioids, or rapidly acting antihypertensives will usually avoid serious morbidity. If hypertension is unresponsive to the treatment recommended in the relevant sub-algorithm, an unusual cause such as phaeochromocytoma, carcinoid syndrome, or thyroid storm should be considered.

Crisis management during anaesthesia: cardiac arrest.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac arrest attributable to anaesthesia occurs at the rate of between 0.5 and 1 case per 10 000 cases, tends to have a different profile to that of cardiac arrest occurring elsewhere, and has an in-hospital mortality of 20%. However, as individual practitioners encounter cardiac arrest rarely, the rapidity with which the diagnosis is made and the consistency of appropriate management varies considerably. OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of a previously described core algorithm "COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK", supplemented by a sub-algorithm for cardiac arrest, in the management of cardiac arrest occurring in association with anaesthesia. METHODS: The potential performance of this structured approach for each the relevant incidents among the first 4000 reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS) was compared with the actual management as reported by the anaesthetists involved. RESULTS: There were 129 reports of cardiac arrest associated with anaesthesia among the first 4000 AIMS incident reports. Identified aetiological factors were grouped into five categories: (1) anaesthetic technique (11 cases with this category alone; 32 with this and one or more of the other categories, representing 25% of all 129 cardiac arrests); (2) drug related (16; 32, 25%); (3) associated with surgical procedure (9; 29, 22%); (4) associated with pre-existing medical or surgical disease (30; 82, 64%); (5) unknown (8; 14, 11%). The "real life" presentation and management of cardiac arrest in association with anaesthesia differs substantially from that detailed in general published guidelines. Cardiac rhythms at the time were sinus bradycardia (23%); asystole (22%); tachycardia/ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation (14%); and normal (7%), with a further third unknown. Details of treatment were recorded in 110 reports; modalities employed included cardiac compression (72%); adrenaline (61%); 100% oxygen (58%); atropine (38%); intravenous fluids (25%), and electrical defibrillation (17%). There were no deaths or permanent morbidity in the 11 cases due solely to anaesthetic technique. 24 of the 25 deaths occurred in patients with significant pre-existing medical or surgical disease. CONCLUSION: Because there are often multiple contributing factors to a cardiac arrest under anaesthesia, a complete systematic assessment of the patient, equipment, and drugs should be completed. The "COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK" algorithm was judged to be a satisfactory process in this context and should be carried out even if the cause of the cardiac arrest is already thought to have been found. The diagnosis and management of cardiac arrest in association with anaesthesia differs considerably from that encountered elsewhere. The outcome is generally good, with most patients leaving hospital alive and apparently well.

Crisis management during anaesthesia: problems associated with drug administration during anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Modern anaesthetic practice relies upon the administration of a wide range of potent drugs given by a variety of routes, at times in haste or under conditions of stress. Problems associated with drug administration make up the largest group of incidents reported during anaesthesia, with outcomes including major morbidity and death. It was decided to examine the role of a structured approach to the diagnosis and management of drug problems under anaesthesia. OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of a previously described core algorithm "COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK", supplemented by a specific sub-algorithm for drug problems, in the detection and management of drug problems occurring in association with anaesthesia. METHODS: The potential performance of this structured approach for the relevant incidents among the first 4000 incidents reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS) was compared with the actual performances as reported by the anaesthetists involved. RESULTS: Among the first 4000 reports received by AIMS there were 1199 reports which detailed 1361 incidents involving the use of drugs. Contributing factors named included errors of judgement (20%), lack of attention (17%), and drugs deemed to have been given in haste. Major morbidity or prolonged stay ensued in over one quarter of reports and 15 patients (1.25%) died. Drug overdose, side effects, and allergic reactions accounted for the majority of serious outcomes. CONCLUSION: It was judged that the use of the COVER-ABCD algorithm during the course of an anaesthetic, properly applied, would prevent many drug related incidents from occurring. The sub-algorithm presented here provides a systematic framework for detecting the causes of drug related incidents.

Crisis management during anaesthesia: pneumothorax.

BACKGROUND: Pneumothorax is a potentially dangerous condition which may arise unexpectedly during anaesthesia. The diagnosis is one of exclusion, as initial changes in vital signs (cardiorespiratory decompensation and difficulty with ventilation) are non-specific, and other causes of such changes are more common, whereas local signs may be difficult to elicit, especially without full access to the chest. OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of a previously described core algorithm "COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK", supplemented by a specific sub-algorithm for pneumothorax, in the management of pneumothorax occurring in association with anaesthesia. METHODS: Reports of pneumothorax were extracted and studied from the first 4000 incidents reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS). The potential performance of the structured approach, using the combination of algorithims described above for each of the relevant incidents, was compared with the actual management as reported by the anaesthetists involved. RESULTS: Pneumothorax was noted as a possible diagnosis in 65 reports; 24 cases had a confirmed pneumothorax, of which 17 were in association with general anaesthesia. It was considered that, correctly applied, the application of the algorithms would have led to earlier recognition of the problem and/or better management in 12% of cases. CONCLUSION: Any pneumothorax may become a dangerous tension pneumothorax with the application of positive pressure ventilation. Limited access to the chest during anaesthesia may compromise the diagnosis. Recognition of any preoperative predisposition to a pneumothorax (for example, iatrogenic or traumatic penetrating procedures around the base of the neck) and close communication with the surgeon are important. Aspiration diagnosis in suspected cases and correct insertion of a chest drain are essential for the safe conduct of anaesthesia and surgery.

Trauma: development of a sub-algorithm.

BACKGROUND: Anaesthetists are regularly involved in the management of patients who have suffered trauma. Acute physiological derangements can occur at any time after the original injury, with life threatening sequelae. These problems may be complex in nature and evolve rapidly, often with an obscure aetiology, so a systematic approach to them is essential. OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of a previously described core algorithm "COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK" supplemented by a specific sub-algorithm for trauma, in the management of anaesthesia involving trauma cases. METHODS: The potential performance of a structured approach for each of the trauma incidents among the first 4000 incidents reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS) was compared with the actual performance as reported by the anaesthetists involved. RESULTS: There were 38 relevant reports relating to trauma in the first 4000 reports to AIMS. In 39% of these there was "emergency corner cutting", although in the majority the urgency was thought to have been more perceived than real. The previously described "core" crisis management algorithm for crises during general anaesthesia was an effective means of discovering (82%), diagnosing (68%), and correcting (66%) the majority of trauma incidents. However a sub-algorithm specific for the traumatised patient was required for unusual, obscure, or complex presentations. CONCLUSION: Although the small numbers preclude validation of the sub-algorithm, it would have successfully managed all the trauma cases reported to AIMS.

Crisis management during regional anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Regional anaesthesia is widely used and has been considered to pose few risks once the block is established. However, life threatening problems can occur both during the establishment and maintenance phases of a regional block which require prompt recognition and management. OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of a previously described core algorithm "COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK", supplemented by a specific sub-algorithm for regional anaesthesia, in the management of problems arising in association with regional anaesthesia. METHODS: The potential performance of this structured approach was assessed for each of the relevant incidents among the first 4000 reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS). RESULTS: There were 252 incidents involving regional anaesthesia, 6.3% of the first 4000 reports to AIMS. Of these, the majority (78%) involved the use of epidural or spinal anaesthesia. The core algorithm AB COVER CD properly applied, would have accounted for 45% of all problems, and is worth applying to eliminate unexpected problems unrelated to the regional anaesthesia technique itself. Hypotension and dysrhythmias made up over 30% of all incidents and accounted for all six deaths in the 252 incidents. The specific sub-algorithm for regional anaesthetic techniques accounted for 55% of all incidents: problems with delivery to the site of action, 49 cases (19%); problems with the block, 30 cases (12%); local anaesthetic toxicity, 30 cases (12%); trauma, infection, or pain, 14 cases (6%), wrong side or wrong patient, five cases (2%). CONCLUSION: Based on an analysis of 252 incidents, the core algorithm and the regional anaesthesia sub-algorithm, properly applied, would lead to swift recognition and appropriate management of problems arising in association with regional anaesthesia.

Crisis management during anaesthesia: difficult intubation.

BACKGROUND: Anaesthetists may experience difficulty with intubation unexpectedly which may be associated with difficulty in ventilating the patient. If not well managed, there may be serious consequences for the patient. A simple structured approach to this problem was developed to assist the anaesthetist in this difficult situation. OBJECTIVES: To examine the role of a specific sub-algorithm for the management of difficult intubation. METHODS: The potential performance of a structured approach developed by review of the literature and analysis of each of the relevant incidents among the first 4000 reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS) was compared with the actual management as reported by the anaesthetists involved. RESULTS: There were 147 reports of difficult intubation capable of analysis among the first 4000 incidents reported to AIMS. The difficulty was unexpected in 52% of cases; major physiological changes occurred in 37% of these cases. Saturation fell below 90% in 22% of cases, oesophageal intubation was reported in 19%, and an emergency transtracheal airway was required in 4% of cases. Obesity and limited neck mobility and mouth opening were the most common anatomical contributing factors. CONCLUSION: The data confirm previously reported failures to predict difficult intubation with existing preoperative clinical tests and suggest an ongoing need to teach a pre-learned strategy to deal with difficult intubation and any associated problem with ventilation. An easy-to-follow structured approach to these problems is outlined. It is recommended that skilled assistance be obtained (preferably another anaesthetist) when difficulty is expected or the patient's cardiorespiratory reserve is low. Patients should be assessed postoperatively to exclude any sequelae and to inform them of the difficulties encountered. These should be clearly documented and appropriate steps taken to warn future anaesthetists.