Preparedness for Severe Maternal Morbidity in European Hospitals: The MaCriCare Study.

PURPOSE: To evaluate obstetric units (OUs) and intensive care units (ICUs) preparedness for severe maternal morbidity (SMM). METHODS: From September 2021 to January 2022, an international multicentre cross-sectional study surveyed OUs in 26 WHO Europe Region countries. We assessed modified early obstetric warning score usage (MEOWS), approaches to four SMM clinical scenarios, invasive monitoring availability in OUs, and access to high-dependency units (HDUs) and onsite ICUs. Within ICUs, we examined the availability of trained staff, response to obstetric emergencies, leadership, and data collection. RESULTS: 1133 responses were evaluated. MEOWS use was 34.5%. Non-obstetric early warning scores were being used. 21.4% (242) of OUs provided invasive monitoring in the OU. A quarter lacked access to onsite HDU beds. In cases of SMM, up to 13.8% of all OUs indicated the need for transfer to another hospital. The transfer rate was highest (74.0%) in small units. 81.9% of centers provided onsite ICU facilities to obstetric patients. Over 90% of the onsite ICUs provided daily specialist obstetric reviews but lacked immediate access to key resources: 3.4% - uterotonic drugs, 7.5% - neonatal resuscitation equipment, 9.2% - neonatal resuscitation team, 11.4% - perimortem cesarean section equipment. 41.2% reported obstetric data to a national database. CONCLUSION: Gaps in provision exist for obstetric patients with SMM in Europe, potentially compromising patient safety and experience. MEOWS use in OUs was low, while access to invasive monitoring and onsite HDU and ICU facilities was variable. ICUs frequently lacked resources and did not universally collect obstetric data for quality control.

Efficacy and safety of three inflation methods of the laryngeal mask airway Ambu® Auraonce™: a randomized controlled study.

The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is commonly used for airway management. Cuff hyperinflation has been associated with complications, poor ventilation and increased risk of gastric insufflation. This study was designed to determine the best cuff inflation method of AuraOnce™ LMA during bronchoscopy and EBUS (Endobronquial Ultrasound Bronchoscopy) procedure. We designed a Randomized controlled, doble-blind, clinical trial to compare the efficacy and safety of three cuff inflation methods of AuraOnce™ LMA. 210 consenting patients scheduled for EBUS procedure under general anesthesia, using AuraOnce™ LMA were randomized into three groups depending on cuff insufflation: residual volume (RV), half of the maximum volume (MV), unchanged volume (NV). Parameters regarding intracuff pressure (IP), airway leak pressure (OLP), leakage volume (LV) were assessed, as well as postoperative complications (PC). 201 (95.7%) patients completed the study. Mean IP differed between groups (MV: 59.4 ± 32.4 cm H2O; RV: 75.1 ± 21.1 cm H2O; NV: 83.1 ± 25.5 cmH20; P < 0.01). The incidence of IP > 60 cmH2O was lower in the MV group compared to the other two (MV: 20/65(30.8%); RV:47/69 (68.1%); NV 48/67 (71.6%); p < 0.01). The insertion success rate was 89,6% (180/201) at first attempt, with no difference between groups (p = 0.38). No difference between groups was found either for OLP (p = 0.53), LV (p = 0.26) and PC (p = 0.16). When a cuff manometer is not available, a partial inflation of AuraOnce™ LMA cuff using MV method allows to control intracuff pressure, with no significant changes of OLP and LV compared to RV and NV insufflation method.Registration clinical trial: NCT04769791.

Fatigue among anaesthesiologists in Europe: Findings from a joint EBA/NASC survey.

BACKGROUND: Anaesthesiologists deliver an increasing amount of patient care and often work long hours in operating theatres and intensive care units, with frequent on-calls and insufficient rest in between. In the long term, this will negatively influence mental and physical health and well being. As fatigue becomes more prevalent, this has predictable implications for patient safety and clinical effectiveness. 1. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the prevalence, severity, causes and implications of work-related fatigue amongst specialist anaesthesiologists. DESIGN: An online survey of specialist anaesthesiologists. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was sent to anaesthesiologists in 42 European countries by electronic mail. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Responses from a 36-item online survey assessed work-related fatigue and its impact on anaesthesiologists in European countries. RESULTS: Work-related fatigue was experienced in 91.6% of the 1508 respondents from 32 European countries. Fatigue was caused by their working patterns, clinical and nonclinical workloads, staffing issues and excessive work hours. Over 70% reported that work-related fatigue negatively impacted on their physical and mental health, emotional well being and safe commuting. Most respondents did not feel supported by their organisation to maintain good health and well being. CONCLUSION: Work-related fatigue is a significant and widespread problem amongst anaesthesiologists. More education and increased awareness of fatigue and its adverse effects on patient safety, staff well being and physical and mental health are needed. Departments should ensure that their rotas and job plans comply with the European Working Time Directive (EWTD) and introduce a fatigue risk management system to mitigate the effects of fatigue.

Documento multidisciplinar de consenso sobre el manejo de la hemorragia masiva. Primera actualización 2023 (documento HEMOMAS-II) / Multidisciplinary consensus document on the management of massive haemorrhage. First update 2023 (document HEMOMAS-II)

El presente documento supone una puesta al día del documento multidisciplinar HEMOMAS, publicado en el año 2016 con el aval de las Sociedades Científicas Españolas de Anestesiología y Reanimación (SEDAR), Medicina Intensiva, Crítica y Unidades Coronarias (SEMICYUC) y de Trombosis y Hemostasia (SETH). El objetivo de este documento fue revisar y actualizar las recomendaciones existentes sobre el manejo de la hemorragia masiva (HM). Se siguió una metodología basada en elementos del método ADAPTE (búsqueda y adaptación de guías publicadas en el ámbito específico de la HM desde 2014, más búsqueda bibliográfica en PubMed y EMBASE desde enero-2014 hasta junio-2021). Tras la revisión de nueve guías y 207 artículos seleccionados, se actualizaron las 47 recomendaciones existentes en el artículo original, manteniendo, suprimiendo o modificando cada una de ellas y sus grados de recomendación y evidencia. Consensuadamente, los autores aprobaron la redacción final del artículo y las 41 recomendaciones resultantes.(AU)

This document is an update of the multidisciplinary document HEMOMAS, published in 2016 with the endorsement of the Spanish Scientific Societies of Anaesthesiology (SEDAR), Intensive Care (SEMICYUC) and Thrombosis and Haemostasis (SETH). The aim of this document was to review and update existing recommendations on the management of massive haemorrhage. The methodology of the update was based on several elements of the ADAPTE method by searching and adapting guidelines published in the specific field of massive bleeding since 2014, plus a literature search performed in PubMed and EMBASE from January 2014 to June 2021. Based on the review of 9 guidelines and 207 selected articles, the 47 recommendations in the original article were reviewed, maintaining, deleting, or modifying each of them and the accompanying grades of recommendation and evidence. Following a consensus process, the final wording of the article and the resulting 41 recommendations were approved by all authors.(AU)

Multidisciplinary consensus document on the management of massive haemorrhage. First update 2023 (document HEMOMAS-II).

This document is an update of the multidisciplinary document HEMOMAS, published in 2016 with the endorsement of the Spanish Scientific Societies of Anaesthesiology (SEDAR), Intensive Care (SEMICYUC) and Thrombosis and Haemostasis (SETH). The aim of this document was to review and update existing recommendations on the management of massive haemorrhage. The methodology of the update was based on several elements of the ADAPTE method by searching and adapting guidelines published in the specific field of massive bleeding since 2014, plus a literature search performed in PubMed and EMBASE from January 2014 to June 2021. Based on the review of 9 guidelines and 207 selected articles, the 47 recommendations in the original article were reviewed, maintaining, deleting, or modifying each of them and the accompanying grades of recommendation and evidence. Following a consensus process, the final wording of the article and the resulting 41 recommendations were approved by all authors.

Multidisciplinary consensus document on the management of massive haemorrhage. First update 2023 (document HEMOMAS-II).

This document is an update of the multidisciplinary document HEMOMAS, published in 2016 with the endorsement of the Spanish Scientific Societies of Anaesthesiology (SEDAR), Intensive Care (SEMICYUC) and Thrombosis and Haemostasis (SETH). The aim of this document was to review and update existing recommendations on the management of massive haemorrhage. The methodology of the update was based on several elements of the ADAPTE method by searching and adapting guidelines published in the specific field of massive bleeding since 2014, plus a literature search performed in PubMed and EMBASE from January 2014 to June 2021. Based on the review of 9 guidelines and 207 selected articles, the 47 recommendations in the original article were reviewed, maintaining, deleting, or modifying each of them and the accompanying grades of recommendation and evidence. Following a consensus process, the final wording of the article and the resulting 41 recommendations were approved by all authors.

Documento multidisciplinar de consenso sobre el manejo de la hemorragia masiva. Primera actualización 2023 (documento HEMOMAS-II) / Multidisciplinary consensus document on the management of massive haemorrhage. First update 2023 (document HEMOMAS-II)

El presente documento supone una puesta al día del documento multidisciplinar HEMOMAS, publicado en el año 2016 con el aval de las Sociedades Científicas Españolas de Anestesiología y Reanimación (SEDAR), Medicina Intensiva, Crítica y Unidades Coronarias (SEMICYUC) y de Trombosis y Hemostasia (SETH). El objetivo de este documento fue revisar y actualizar las recomendaciones existentes sobre el manejo de la hemorragia masiva (HM). Se siguió una metodología basada en elementos del método ADAPTE (búsqueda y adaptación de guías publicadas en el ámbito específico de la HM desde 2014, más búsqueda bibliográfica en PubMed y EMBASE desde enero-2014 hasta junio-2021). Tras la revisión de nueve guías y 207 artículos seleccionados, se actualizaron las 47 recomendaciones existentes en el artículo original, manteniendo, suprimiendo o modificando cada una de ellas y sus grados de recomendación y evidencia. Consensuadamente, los autores aprobaron la redacción final del artículo y las 41 recomendaciones resultantes (AU)

This document is an update of the multidisciplinary document HEMOMAS, published in 2016 with the endorsement of the Spanish Scientific Societies of Anaesthesiology (SEDAR), Intensive Care (SEMICYUC) and Thrombosis and Haemostasis (SETH). The aim of this document was to review and update existing recommendations on the management of massive haemorrhage. The methodology of the update was based on several elements of the ADAPTE method by searching and adapting guidelines published in the specific field of massive bleeding since 2014, plus a literature search performed in PubMed and EMBASE from January 2014 to June 2021. Based on the review of 9 guidelines and 207 selected articles, the 47 recommendations in the original article were reviewed, maintaining, deleting, or modifying each of them and the accompanying grades of recommendation and evidence. Following a consensus process, the final wording of the article and the resulting 41 recommendations were approved by all authors (AU)

A consensus statement on the meaning, value and utility of training programme outcomes, with specific reference to anaesthesiology: A consensus statement on training programme outcomes.

It is timely and necessary to consider what Postgraduate Medical Training Programme outcomes are, how they are defined and revised over time, and how they can be used to align health professional performance with the healthcare needs of society. This article which addresses those issues, with specific reference to training in anaesthesiology, was prepared using a modified nominal group (or expert panel) approach.

Teaching and Learning Obstetric Anaesthesia in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Current Situation and Perspectives.

Purpose of Review: Our goal in this review is to describe the current context and peculiarities of obstetric anaesthesia in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) and the ongoing actions and perspectives in terms of teaching and learning, focusing on improving maternal outcomes. Recent Findings: Correct identification of barriers and lack of infrastructures and anaesthesia providers are still major problems despite efforts of different stakeholders. International consensus and commitment for 2030 goals are trying to be achieved. Summary: Structured training courses look a good option as short- and long-term evaluations show a positive impact. Future efforts will have to be also focused on indicators that may help to decrease the high mortality and morbidity ratios in LMIC.

Haemostatic support in postpartum haemorrhage: A review of the literature and expert opinion.

Postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) remains the leading cause of pregnancy-related deaths worldwide. Typically, bleeding is controlled by timely obstetric measures in parallel with resuscitation and treatment of coagulopathy. Early recognition of abnormal coagulation is crucial and haemostatic support should be considered simultaneously with other strategies as coagulopathies contribute to the progression to massive haemorrhage. However, there is lack of agreement on important topics in the current guidelines for management of PPH. A clinical definition of PPH is paramount to understand the situation to which the treatment recommendations relate; however, reaching a consensus has previously proven difficult. Traditional definitions are based on volume of blood loss, which is difficult to monitor, can be misleading and leads to treatment delay. A multidisciplinary approach to define PPH considering vital signs, clinical symptoms, coagulation and haemodynamic changes is needed. Moreover, standardised algorithms or massive haemorrhage protocols should be developed to reduce the risk of morbidity and mortality and improve overall clinical outcomes in PPH. If available, point-of-care testing should be used to guide goal-directed haemostatic treatment. Tranexamic acid should be administered as soon as abnormal bleeding is recognised. Fibrinogen concentrate rather than fresh frozen plasma should be administered to restore haemostasis where there is elevated risk of fibrinogen deficiency (e.g., in catastrophic bleeding or in cases of abruption or amniotic fluid embolism) as it is a more concentrated source of fibrinogen. Lastly, organisational considerations are equally as important as clinical interventions in the management of PPH and have the potential to improve patient outcomes.

Factors associated with failed epidural blood patch after accidental dural puncture in obstetrics: a prospective, multicentre, international cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Epidural blood patch is commonly used for management of post-dural puncture headache after accidental dural puncture. The primary aim was to determine factors associated with failed epidural blood patch. METHODS: In this prospective, multicentre, international cohort study, parturients ≥18 yr receiving an epidural blood patch for treatment of post-dural puncture headache were included. Failed epidural blood patch was defined as headache intensity numeric rating scale (NRS) score ≥7 in the upright position at 4, 24, or 48 h, or the need for a second epidural blood patch, and complete success by NRS=0 at 0-48 h after epidural blood patch. All others were considered partial success. Multinominal logistic regression was used for statistical analyses with P<0.01 considered statistically significant. RESULTS: In all, 643 women received an epidural blood patch. Complete data to classify failure were available in 591 (91.9%) women. Failed epidural blood patch occurred in 167 (28.3%) patients; 195 (33.0%) were completely successful and 229 (38.7%) partially successful. A total of 126 women (19.8%) received a second epidural blood patch. A statistically significant association with failure was observed in patients with a history of migraine, when the accidental dural puncture occurred between lumbar levels L1/L3 compared with L3/L5 and when epidural blood patch was performed <48 h compared with ≥48 h after accidental dural puncture. In patients having radiological investigations, three intracranial bleeds were diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: Failed epidural blood patch occurred in 28.3% of women. Independent modifiable factors associated with failure were higher lumbar level of accidental dural puncture and short interval between accidental dural puncture and epidural blood patch. A history of migraine was associated with a higher risk of second epidural blood patch. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02362828.

Peripartum anesthetic management of women with SARS-CoV-2 infection in eight medical centers across three European countries: prospective cohort observation study.

OBJECTIVE: Several reports of obstetric anesthesia management have been published since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to collect high-quality broad and detailed data from different university medical centers in several European Society of Anesthesiologist countries. METHODS: This prospective observational survey was performed in eight medical centers in Spain, Israel and Portugal from 1st April to 31st July 2020. Institutional review board approval was received at each participating center. Inclusion criteria: all women with a positive test for COVID-19. Retrieved data included maternal, delivery, anesthetic, postpartum details, and neonatal outcomes. Descriptive data are presented, and outcomes were compared for women with versus without respiratory signs and symptoms. RESULTS: Women with respiratory symptoms (20/12.1%) had significantly higher mean (standard deviation) temperature (37.2 °C (0.8) versus 36.8 °C (0.6)), were older (34.1 (6.7) years versus 30.5 (6.6)) and had higher body mass index kg m-2 - (29.5 (7.5) versus 28.2 (5.1)). Women with respiratory symptoms delivered at a significantly earlier gestational age (50% < 37 weeks) with a 65% cesarean delivery rate (versus 22.1% in the group without respiratory symptoms) and 5-fold increased rate of emergency cesarean delivery, 30% performed under general anesthesia. A higher rate of intrauterine fetal death (3%) was observed than expected from the literature (0.2-0.3%) in developed countries. There was no evidence of viral vertical transmission. CONCLUSION: Well-functioning neuraxial analgesia should be available to manage laboring women with respiratory symptoms, as there is a higher frequency of emergency cesarean delivery. We report a higher rate of undiagnosed parturient and intrauterine fetal death.

COVID in obstetrics: labor analgesia and cesarean section.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review is based on the latest evidence to provide a good standard of care for COVID-19 parturients and protection to healthcare givers. RECENT FINDINGS: COVID-19 by itself is not an indication for cesarean section. Different publications demonstrated the efficacy of neuraxial analgesia/anesthesia for delivery. Although SARS-CoV-2 was associated with a certain neurotropism, neuraxial block was not associated with neurological damage in COVID-19 parturients, and seems as safe and effective as in normal situations. It permits to avoid a general anesthesia in case of intrapartum cesarean section. Epidural failure is a concern: it may lead to a general anesthesia in case of emergency cesarean section. Local protocols and well-trained anesthesiologists will be helpful. COVID-19 patients require special circuits and every step (transfer to and from theatre, recovery, analgesia, and so on) should be planned in advance. For cesarean section under general anesthesia, personal protection equipment must be enhanced. Postoperative analgesia with neuraxial opioids, NSAIDs, or regional blocks are recommended. COVID-19 and pregnancy increase the risk of thrombosis, so thromboprophylaxis has to be considered and protocolized. SUMMARY: Anesthetic care for delivery in COVID-19 parturients should include neuraxial blocks. Special attention should be paid on the risk of thrombosis.

European minimum standards for obstetric analgesia and anaesthesia departments: An experts' consensus.

: An important variability of anaesthetic standards of care was discovered in the obstetric departments of many European Union countries. After discussing this issue in various meetings of the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) board and its obstetric subcommittee, European Board of Anaesthesiology of the European Union of Medical Specialists (EBA-UEMS) executive members, ESA obstetric subcommittee members and European experts in obstetric anaesthesiology have participated in the elaboration of this document. This experts' opinion is focused mainly on obstetric patients and safety concerns in terms of minimum standards of practice. An initial bibliographical search was performed in medical databases and general literature, searching for obstetric anaesthesiology standards to select the most important safety issues. After the initial presentation of the project during EBA-UEMS and ESA obstetric subcommittee meetings, participants were asked to review the document; several rounds of revisions were performed by the experts, to reach a common opinion concerning the topics considered central to patient safety in the obstetric setting. After three rounds of revision, a consensus was reached and is presented in this document, which includes the list of topics considered relevant by the involved areas, and the respective recommendations. These recommendations covered some EBA-UEMS strategic key areas, in addition to several clinical aspects of common obstetric practice.

Combined spinal epidural for labour analgesia and caesarean section: indications and recommendations.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Even if its use is scarce in most countries, many articles concerning combined spinal epidural (CSE) were published. In this review, we present the latest advances concerning CSE in obstetrics. RECENT FINDINGS: During labour, CSE improves epidural analgesia quality. Epidural with intradural opioids can produce maternal hypotension and foetal heart rate abnormalities (FHR-Ab), without increasing the caesarean section rate. For caesarean section, CSE decreases the neuraxial block failure rate, with no significant increase of complications. Epidural volume extension (EVE) after CSE for caesarean section could be an interesting option even though more evidence is needed. SUMMARY: For labour analgesia, CSE has the fastest onset time of analgesia. Its side effects have no consequences on maternal, labour or foetal outcomes. It provides better analgesia than epidural analgesia and can be used for external cephalic version and high-risk patients. For caesarean section, CSE has become the reference neuraxial technique for low-dose spinal anaesthesia, with higher success rate compared with regular spinal anaesthesia. Recent systematic revisions did not confirm this superiority. CSE offers the advantage of EVE, intraoperative top-ups, postoperative administration of neuraxial opioids and local anaesthetics. The risk of complications is balanced by the benefits of the technique.