Principles of environmentally-sustainable anaesthesia: a global consensus statement from the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists.

The Earth's mean surface temperature is already approximately 1.1°C higher than pre-industrial levels. Exceeding a mean 1.5°C rise by 2050 will make global adaptation to the consequences of climate change less possible. To protect public health, anaesthesia providers need to reduce the contribution their practice makes to global warming. We convened a Working Group of 45 anaesthesia providers with a recognised interest in sustainability, and used a three-stage modified Delphi consensus process to agree on principles of environmentally sustainable anaesthesia that are achievable worldwide. The Working Group agreed on the following three important underlying statements: patient safety should not be compromised by sustainable anaesthetic practices; high-, middle- and low-income countries should support each other appropriately in delivering sustainable healthcare (including anaesthesia); and healthcare systems should be mandated to reduce their contribution to global warming. We set out seven fundamental principles to guide anaesthesia providers in the move to environmentally sustainable practice, including: choice of medications and equipment; minimising waste and overuse of resources; and addressing environmental sustainability in anaesthetists' education, research, quality improvement and local healthcare leadership activities. These changes are achievable with minimal material resource and financial investment, and should undergo re-evaluation and updates as better evidence is published. This paper discusses each principle individually, and directs readers towards further important references.

2022 American Society of Anesthesiologists Practice Guidelines for Management of the Difficult Airway.

The American Society of Anesthesiologists; All India Difficult Airway Association; European Airway Management Society; European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care; Italian Society of Anesthesiology, Analgesia, Resuscitation and Intensive Care; Learning, Teaching and Investigation Difficult Airway Group; Society for Airway Management; Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia; Society for Head and Neck Anesthesia; Society for Pediatric Anesthesia; Society of Critical Care Anesthesiologists; and the Trauma Anesthesiology Society present an updated report of the Practice Guidelines for Management of the Difficult Airway.

Génesis y evolución de la anestesia epidural lumbar en su primer centenario / Genesis and evolution of lumbar epidural anesthesia in its first century

Introducción: La anestesia epidural lumbar es la técnica predilecta para gran número de anestesiólogos. Permite variadas intervenciones quirúrgicas, es útil para el tratamiento del dolor agudo y crónico, a la vez provee al paciente de distintos beneficios. También resalta su versatilidad ya que puede combinarse con otros métodos anestésicos, así como extenderla para el alivio del dolor posoperatorio. Objetivo: Describir los adelantos científicos que propiciaron la aparición de la anestesia epidural lumbar y cuál ha sido la evolución de esta técnica anestésica a lo largo de un siglo. Desarrollo: El acceso por vía lumbar al espacio epidural con fines anestésicos fue publicado por el cirujano español Fidel Pagés en marzo de 1921, luego de una década en el olvido fue introducida por el cirujano italiano Archile Dogliotti en 1931. A partir de entonces, se le han incorporado diversos y valiosos adelantos. Conclusiones: La anestesia epidural lumbar fue descrita hace un siglo por el doctor Pagés. Han sido variados y numerosos los aportes que han recibido, algunos de los cuales han sido objeto de controversias; no obstante, se ha tornado una técnica universal que sigue captando la preferencia de muchos anestesiólogos(AU)

Introduction: Lumbar epidural anesthesia is the technique preferred by a great number of anesthesiologists. It allows performing several surgical interventions and is useful for the treatment of acute and chronic pain; at the same time, it provides the patient with different benefits. It ls also worth highlighting its versatility, since it can be combined with other anesthetic methods, as well as to be extended for postoperative pain relief. Objective: To describe the scientific advances that led to the appearance of lumbar epidural anesthesia and what has been the evolution of this anesthetic technique over a century. Development: the Spanish surgeon Fidel Pagés published lumbar access to the epidural space for anesthetic purposes in March 1921. After a decade in oblivion, the Italian surgeon Archile Dogliotti introduced it, in 1931. From then on, it has been incorporated several valuable advances. Conclusions: Dr. Pagés described lumbar epidural anesthesia a century ago. The contributions achieved have been varied and numerous, some of which have been the subject of controversy; however, it has become a universal technique that continues to capture the preference of many anesthesiologists(AU)

Expert Consensus Statement on the Perioperative Management of Adult Patients Undergoing Head and Neck Surgery and Free Tissue Reconstruction From the Society for Head and Neck Anesthesia.

The perioperative care of adult patients undergoing free tissue transfer during head and neck surgical (microvascular) reconstruction is inconsistent across practitioners and institutions. The executive board of the Society for Head and Neck Anesthesia (SHANA) nominated specialized anesthesiologists and head and neck surgeons to an expert group, to develop expert consensus statements. The group conducted an extensive review of the literature to identify evidence and gaps and to prioritize quality improvement opportunities. This report of expert consensus statements aims to improve and standardize perioperative care in this setting. The Modified Delphi method was used to evaluate the degree of agreement with draft consensus statements. Additional discussion and collaboration was performed via video conference and electronic communication to refine expert opinions and to achieve consensus on key statements. Thirty-one statements were initially formulated, 14 statements met criteria for consensus, 9 were near consensus, and 8 did not reach criteria for consensus. The expert statements reaching consensus described considerations for preoperative assessment and optimization, airway management, perioperative monitoring, fluid management, blood management, tracheal extubation, and postoperative care. This group also examined the role for vasopressors, communication, and other quality improvement efforts. This report provides the priorities and perspectives of a group of clinical experts to help guide perioperative care and provides actionable guidance for and opportunities for improvement in the care of patients undergoing free tissue transfer for head and neck reconstruction. The lack of consensus for some areas likely reflects differing clinical experiences and a limited available evidence base.

Blood Conservation and Hemostasis in Cardiac Surgery: A Survey of Practice Variation and Adoption of Evidence-Based Guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Blood conservation and hemostasis are integral parts of reducing avoidable blood transfusions and the associated morbidity and mortality. Despite the publication of blood conservation guidelines for cardiac surgery, evidence suggests persistent variability in practice patterns. Members of the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists (SCA) created a survey to audit conformance to existing guidelines and use the results to help narrow the evidence-to-practice gap. METHODS: Members of the SCA and its Continuous Practice Improvement (CPI)- Blood Conservation Work Group developed a 48-item Blood Conservation and Hemostasis in Cardiac Surgery (BCHCS) survey. The questionnaire included the components of the Anesthesia Quality Institute's (AQI) composite measure AQI49. The survey was distributed to the entire SCA membership by e-mail via the Research Electronic Data Capture (REDCap) Consortium between the fall of 2017 and early 2018. RESULTS: Of 3152 SCA members, 536 returned surveys for a response rate of 17%. Most responders worked at academic institutions. The median transfusion trigger after cardiopulmonary bypass was hemoglobin (Hgb) 7.0 to 8.0 g/dL. There are 4 components to AQI49, and the composite conformance to all of them was low due to 1 specific component: the use of transfusion algorithms supplemented with point-of-care (POC) testing. There was good conformance to the other 3 components of AQI49: use of antifibrinolytics, minimization of hemodilution and use of red cell salvage. Overall, practices with a multidisciplinary patient blood management (PBM) team were the most successful in meeting all 4 AQI49 criteria. CONCLUSIONS: The survey demonstrated widespread adoption of several best practices, including the tolerance of lower hemoglobin transfusion triggers, use of antifibrinolytics, minimization of hemodilution, and use of red cell salvage. The survey also confirms that gaps remain in preoperative anemia management and the use of transfusion algorithms supplemented with POC hemostasis testing. Serial use of this survey can be used to identify barriers to implementation and audit the effectiveness of interventions described in this article. This instrument could also help harmonize local, regional, and national efforts and become an essential component of an implementation strategy for PBM in cardiac surgery.

Biomechanical analysis of expert anesthesiologists and novice residents performing a simulated central venous access procedure.

BACKGROUND: Central venous access (CVA) is a frequent procedure taught in medical residencies. However, since CVA is a high-risk procedure requiring a detailed teaching and learning process to ensure trainee proficiency, it is necessary to determine objective differences between the expert's and the novice's performance to guide novice practitioners during their training process. This study compares experts' and novices' biomechanical variables during a simulated CVA performance. METHODS: Seven experts and seven novices were part of this study. The participants' motion data during a CVA simulation procedure was collected using the Vicon Motion System. The procedure was divided into four stages for analysis, and each hand's speed, acceleration, and jerk were obtained. Also, the procedural time was analyzed. Descriptive analysis and multilevel linear models with random intercept and interaction were used to analyze group, hand, and stage differences. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between experts and novices regarding time, speed, acceleration, and jerk during a simulated CVA performance. These differences vary significantly by the procedure stage for right-hand acceleration and left-hand jerk. CONCLUSIONS: Experts take less time to perform the CVA procedure, which is reflected in higher speed, acceleration, and jerk values. This difference varies according to the procedure's stage, depending on the hand and variable studied, demonstrating that these variables could play an essential role in differentiating between experts and novices, and could be used when designing training strategies.

Improving Tolerance to Snorkel Mask Use as Alternative Personal Protective Equipment.

Snorkel masks have become an option for personal protective equipment (PPE) due to the shortage of air filtration at least 95% of airborne particle (N95) masks as a result of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. We developed a 3D design of a triheaded adapter that connects a snorkel mask to 3 different National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)-approved air filtration at least 99% of airborne particles (N99) filters with the aim of improving wearer comfort. We measured the resistance of the new triheaded adapter to be one-third the resistance of the single adapter. Interdepartmental survey of anesthesiologists showed an improvement in perceived comfort when using the triheaded adapter as compared to the single adapter.

Association Between Anesthesiologist Volume and Short-term Outcomes in Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery.

Importance: Intraoperative anesthesiology care is crucial to high-quality surgical care. The clinical expertise and experience of anesthesiologists may decrease the risk of adverse outcomes. Objective: To examine the association between anesthesiologist volume and short-term postoperative outcomes for complex gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based cohort study used administrative health care data sets from various data sources in Ontario, Canada. Adult patients who underwent esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, or hepatectomy for GI cancer from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2018, were eligible. Patients with an invalid identification number, a duplicate surgery record, and missing primary anesthesiologist information were excluded. Exposures: Primary anesthesiologist volume was defined as the annual number of procedures of interest (esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, and hepatectomy) supported by that anesthesiologist in the 2 years before the index surgery. Volume was dichotomized into low-volume and high-volume categories, with 75th percentile or 6 or more procedures per year selected as the cutoff point. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcome was a composite of 90-day major morbidity (with a Clavien-Dindo classification grade 3-5) and readmission. Secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome. The association between exposure and outcomes was examined using multivariable logistic regression models, accounting for potential confounders. Results: Of the 8096 patients included, 5369 were men (66.3%) and the median (interquartile range [IQR]) age was 65 (57-72) years. Operations were supported by 842 anesthesiologists and performed by 186 surgeons, and the median (IQR) anesthesiologist volume was 3 (1.5-6) procedures per year. A total of 2166 patients (26.7%) received care from high-volume anesthesiologists. Primary outcome occurred in 36.3% of patients in the high-volume group and 45.7% of patients in the low-volume group. After adjustment, care by high-volume anesthesiologists was independently associated with lower odds of the primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94), major morbidity (aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.91), unplanned intensive care unit admission (aOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94), but not readmission (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.05) or mortality (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84-1.31). E-values analysis indicated that an unmeasured variable would unlikely substantively change the observed risk estimates. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that, among adults who underwent complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery, those who received care from high-volume anesthesiologists had a lower risk of adverse postoperative outcomes compared with those who received care from low-volume anesthesiologists. These findings support organizing perioperative care to increase anesthesiologist volume to optimize patient outcomes.

Improving Adherence to Intraoperative Lung-Protective Ventilation Strategies Using Near Real-Time Feedback and Individualized Electronic Reporting.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications can have a significant impact on the morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing major surgeries. Intraoperative lung protective strategies using low tidal volume (TV) ventilation and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) have been demonstrated to reduce the incidence of pulmonary injury and infection while improving oxygenation and respiratory mechanics. The purpose of this study was to develop decision support systems designed to optimize behavior of the attending anesthesiologist with regards to adherence with established intraoperative lung-protective ventilation (LPV) strategies. METHODS: Over a 4-year period, data were obtained from 49,386 procedures and 109 attendings. Cases were restricted to patients aged 18 years or older requiring general anesthesia that lasted at least 60 minutes. We defined protective lung ventilation as a TV of 6-8 mL/kg ideal body weight and a PEEP of ≥4 cm H2O. There was a baseline period followed by 4 behavioral interventions: education, near real-time feedback, individualized post hoc feedback, and enhanced multidimensional decision support. Segmented logistic regression using generalized estimating equations was performed in order to assess temporal trends and effects of interventions on adherence to LPV strategies. RESULTS: Consistent with improvement in adherence with LPV strategies during the baseline period, the predicted probability of adherence with LPV at the end of baseline was 0.452 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.422-0.483). The improvements observed for each phase were relative to the preceding phase. Education alone was associated with an 8.7% improvement (P < .01) in adherence to lung-protective protocols and was associated with a 16% increase in odds of adherence (odds ratio [OR] = 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01-1.33; P = .04). Near real-time, on-screen feedback was associated with an estimated 15.5% improvement in adherence (P < .01) with a 69% increase in odds of adherence (OR = 1.69; 95% CI, 1.46-1.96; P < .01) over education alone. The addition of an individualized dashboard with personal adherence and peer comparison was associated with a significant improvement over near real-time feedback (P < .01). Near real-time feedback and dashboard feedback systems were enhanced based on feedback from the in-room attendings, and this combination was associated with an 18.1% (P < .01) increase in adherence with a 2-fold increase in the odds of adherence (OR = 2.23; 95% CI, 1.85-2.69; P < .0001) between the end of the previous on-screen feedback phase and the start of the individualized post hoc dashboard reporting phase. The adherence with lung-protective strategies using the multidimensional approach has been sustained for over 24 months. The difference between the end of the previous phase and the start of this last enhanced multidimensional decision support phase was not significant (OR = 1.08; 95% CI, 0.86-1.34; P = .48). CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with the literature, near real-time and post hoc reporting are associated with positive and sustained behavioral changes aimed at adopting evidence-based clinical strategies. Many decision support systems have demonstrated impact to behavior, but the effect is often transient. The implementation of near real-time feedback and individualized post hoc decision support tools has resulted in clinically relevant improvements in adherence with LPV strategies that have been sustained for over 24 months, a common limitation of decision support solutions.

Optimal care for mother and child: Safety in obstetric anaesthesia.

Anaesthetists play a major role in the perioperative treatment of patients, sharing responsibility for quality and safety in anaesthesia, intensive care, emergency and pain medicine. Several aspects lead to the fact that these issues are particularly important in obstetric anaesthesia. As morbidity and mortality are dramatically higher than in a nonpregnant population in this age, there is room for improvement even in regions with a well-developed healthcare system. Adverse events and complications during birth often hit fast, hard and unexpectedly and require immediate patient-centred care. This mostly involves an interdisciplinary and interprofessional approach that includes obstetricians, neonatologists, anaesthetists, intensivists and of course midwives and nurses. In this article, established standards and emerging possibilities to improve patient safety by developing a culture of awareness for safety aspects, education, establishing safety and communication strategies and performing teamwork- and simulation training are discussed. Apart from these issues, self-care of clinicians is vital in the prevention of adverse events, because fatigue and burnout are associated with increased rates of complications.

Rabbit training model for establishing an emergency front of neck airway in children.

BACKGROUND: A 'cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate' (CICO) situation is rare in paediatric anaesthesia, but can always occur in children under certain emergency situations. There is a paucity of literature on specific procedures for securing an emergency invasive airway in children younger than 6 yr. A modified emergency front of neck access (eFONA) technique using a rabbit cadaver model was developed to teach invasive airway protection in a CICO situation in children. METHODS: After watching an instructional video of our eFONA technique (tracheotomy, intubation with Frova catheter over which a tracheal tube is inserted), 29 anaesthesiologists performed two separate attempts on rabbit cadavers. The primary outcome was the success rate and the performance time overall and in subgroups of trained and untrained participants. RESULTS: The overall success rate across 58 tracheotomies was 95% and the median performance time was 67 s (95% confidence interval [CI], 56-76). Performance time decreased from the first to the second attempt from 72 s (95% CI, 57-81) to 61 s (95% CI, 50-81). Performance time was 59 s (95% CI, 49-79) for untrained participants and 72 s (95% CI, 62-81) for trained participants. Clinical experience and age of the participants was not correlated with performance time, whereas the length of the tracheotomy incision showed a significant correlation (P=0.006). CONCLUSION: This eFONA training model for children facilitates rapid skill acquisition under realistic anatomical conditions to perform an emergency invasive airway in children younger than 2 yr.

A Survey of the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia on the Use, Monitoring, and Antagonism of Neuromuscular Blockade.

BACKGROUND: Although the package insert clearly states that "the safety and efficacy of sugammadex in pediatric patients have not been established," we hypothesized that sugammadex is used widely in pediatric anesthetic practice supplanting neostigmine as the primary drug for antagonizing neuromuscular blockade (NMB). Additionally, we sought to identify the determinants by which pediatric anesthesiologists choose reversal agents and if and how they assess NMB in their practice. Finally, because of sugammadex's effects on hormonal contraception, we sought to determine whether pediatric anesthesiologists counseled postmenarchal patients on the need for additional or alternative forms of contraception and the risk of unintended pregnancy in the perioperative period. METHODS: We e-mailed a questionnaire to all 3245 members of the Society of Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA) requesting demographic data and attitudes regarding use of NMB agents, monitoring, and antagonism practices. To address low initial response rates and quantify nonresponse bias, we sent a shortened follow-up survey to a randomly selected subsample (n = 75) of SPA members who did not initially respond. Response differences between the 2 cohorts were determined. RESULTS: Initial questionnaire response rate was 13% (419 of 3245). Overall, 163 respondents (38.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 34.2-43.8) used sugammadex as their primary reversal agent, and 106 (25.2%; 95% CI, 21.2-30.0) used it exclusively. Respondents with ≤5 years of practice used sugammadex as their primary reversal agent more often than those with ≥6 years of practice (odds ratio [OR]: 2.08; 95% CI, 1.31-3.31; P = .001). This increased utilization remained after controlling for institutional restriction and practice type (adjusted OR [aOR]: 2.20; 95% CI, 1.38-3.54; P = .001). Only 40% of practitioners always assess NMB (train-of-four), and use was inversely correlated with years of practice (Spearman ρ = -0.11, P = .04). Anesthesiologists who primarily used sugammadex assess NMB less routinely (OR: 0.56; 95% CI, 0.34-0.90; P = .01). A slim majority (52.8%) used sugammadex for pediatric postmenarchal girls; those with less experience used it more commonly (P < .001). Thirty-eight percent did not discuss its effects on hormonal contraception with the patient and/or family, independent of anesthesiologist experience (P = .33) and practice location (P = .38). No significant differences were seen in demographics or practice responses between initial and follow-up survey respondents. CONCLUSIONS: Sugammadex is commonly used in pediatric anesthesia, particularly among anesthesiologists with fewer years of practice. Failure to warn postmenarchal adolescents of its consequences may result in unintended pregnancies. Finally, pediatric anesthesia training programs should emphasize objective monitoring of NMB, particularly with sugammadex use.

The Origins, Evolution, and Spread of Anesthesia Monitoring Standards: From Boston to Across the World.

In the mid-1980s, the anesthesia departments at hospitals affiliated with Harvard Medical School were faced with a challenge: mounting medical malpractice costs. Malpractice insurance was provided by the Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO), a patient safety and medical malpractice insurance company owned by and providing service to the Harvard medical community. CRICO spearheaded an effort to reduce these costs and ultimately found a way to decrease the risks associated with anesthesia. Here, we chronicle events that led to the dramatic changes in medical practice that resulted from the activities of a small group of concerned anesthesiologists at Harvard-affiliated hospitals. We place these events in a historical perspective and explore how other specialties followed this example, and end with current strategies that minimize the risk associated with anesthesia. We conducted interviews with principals who formulated original standards of patient monitoring. In addition, we consulted documents in the public domain and primary source material. Efforts of these pioneers resulted in the establishment of the seminal Harvard-based anesthesia monitoring standards for minimal monitoring. What followed was an unprecedented transformation of the entire field. After the implementation of these standards at Harvard-affiliated hospitals, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) adopted "Standards for Basic Anesthetic Monitoring" for use during the administration of all anesthetics in the United States. Other nations have since adopted similar guidelines and these practices have resulted in significant improvements in patient safety. Currently, we estimate mortality due to anesthesia in healthy patients to be 1:400,000-perhaps as much as 10 times lower since the early 1980s. What began as an attempt to lower medical malpractice costs in a group of university hospitals became a worldwide effort that resulted in improvements in patient safety. Other specialties have adopted similar measures. Currently, an attitude and appreciation of safety are exemplified by several practices that include among others-the adherence to these patient safety guidelines, simulator training, the promulgation of standards and guidelines by ASA, and the use of a safety checklist before induction of anesthesia.

The Current State of Combined Pediatric Anesthesiology-Critical Care Practice: A Survey of Dual-Trained Practitioners in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Combined practice in pediatric anesthesiology (PA) and pediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) was historically common but has declined markedly with time. The reasons for this temporal shift are unclear, but existing evidence suggests that length of training is a barrier to contemporary trainees. Among current practitioners, restriction in dual-specialty practice also occurs, for reasons that are unknown at present. We sought to describe the demographics of this population, investigate their perceptions about the field, and consider factors that lead to attrition. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, observational study of physicians in the United States with a combined practice in PA and PCCM. The survey was distributed electronically and anonymously to the distribution list of the Pediatric Anesthesia Leadership Council (PALC) of the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA), directing the recipients to forward the link to their faculty meeting our inclusion criteria. Attending-level respondents (n = 62) completed an anonymous, 40-question multidomain survey. RESULTS: Forty-seven men and 15 women, with a median age of 51, completed the survey. Major leadership positions are held by 44%, and 55% are externally funded investigators. A minority (26%) have given up one or both specialties, citing time constraints and politics as the dominant reasons. Duration of training was cited as the major barrier to entry by 77%. Increasing age and faculty rank and lack of a comparably trained institutional colleague were associated with attrition from dual-specialty practice. The majority (88%) reported that they would do it all again. CONCLUSIONS: The current cohort of pediatric anesthesiologist-intensivists in the United States is a small but accomplished group of physicians. Efforts to train, recruit, and retain such providers must address systematic barriers to completion of the requisite training and continued practice.

Association between leniency of anesthesiologists when evaluating certified registered nurse anesthetists and when evaluating didactic lectures.

Daily evaluations of certified registered nurse anesthetists' (CRNAs') work habits by anesthesiologists should be adjusted for rater leniency. The current study tested the hypothesis that there is a pairwise association by rater between leniencies of evaluations of CRNAs' daily work habits and of didactic lectures. The historical cohorts were anesthesiologists' evaluations over 53 months of CRNAs' daily work habits and 65 months of didactic lectures by visiting professors and faculty. The binary endpoints were the Likert scale scores for all 6 and 10 items, respectively, equaling the maximums of 5 for all items, or not. Mixed effects logistic regression estimated the odds of each ratee performing above or below average adjusted for rater leniency. Bivariate errors in variables least squares linear regression estimated the association between the leniency of the anesthesiologists' evaluations of work habits and didactic lectures. There were 29/107 (27%) raters who were more severe in their evaluations of CRNAs' work habits than other anesthesiologists (two-sided P < 0.01); 34/107 (32%) raters were more lenient. When evaluating lectures, 3/81 (4%) raters were more severe and 8/81 (10%) more lenient. Among the 67 anesthesiologists rating both, leniency (or severity) for work habits was not associated with that for lectures (P = 0.90, unitless slope between logits 0.02, 95% confidence interval -0.34 to 0.30). Rater leniency is of large magnitude when making daily clinical evaluations, even when using a valid and psychometrically reliable instrument. Rater leniency was context dependent, not solely a reflection of raters' personality or rating style.

Anesthesia for Patients Undergoing Anesthesia for Elective Thoracic Surgery During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Consensus Statement From the Israeli Society of Anesthesiologists.

Anesthesia for thoracic surgery requires specialist intervention to provide adequate operating conditions and one-lung ventilation. The pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is transmitted by aerosol and droplet spread. Because of its virulence, there is a risk of transmission to healthcare workers if appropriate preventive measures are not taken. Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients may show no clinical signs at the early stages of the disease or even remain asymptomatic for the whole course of the disease. Despite the lack of symptoms, they may be able to transfer the virus. Unfortunately, during current COVID-19 testing procedures, about 30% of tests are associated with a false-negative result. For these reasons, standard practice is to assume all patients are COVID-19 positive regardless of swab results. Here, the authors present the recommendations produced by the Israeli Society of Anesthesiologists for use in thoracic anesthesia for elective surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic for both the general population and COVID-19-confirmed patients. The objective of these recommendations is to make changes to some routine techniques in thoracic anesthesia to augment patients' and the medical staff's safety.

Infection Prevention Strategy in Operating Room during Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Outbreak.

A novel coronavirus that emerged in late 2019 rapidly spread around the world. Most severe cases need endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation, and some mild cases may need emergent surgery under general anesthesia. The novel coronavirus was reported to transmit via droplets, contact and natural aerosols from human to human. Therefore, aerosol-producing procedures such as endotracheal intubation and airway suction may put the healthcare providers at high risk of nosocomial infection. Based on recently published articles, this review provides detailed feasible recommendations for primary anesthesiologists on infection prevention in operating room during COVID-19 outbreak.

Shared decision-making - Creating pathways and models of care.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is an essential element providing patient-centered perioperative care. Newer value-based healthcare models, defined as patient-centered outcomes versus the cost required to achieve these outcomes, will necessitate the use of metrics that reflect the alignment of treatment decisions with patient preferences and goals. The heart of a successful SDM conversation is ensuring this alignment. Accountability for ensuring high quality SDM perioperatively is not clearly assigned. By learning methodologies to successfully incorporate SDM into clinical practice, anesthesiologists can increase the value of care they provide to their patients. The ideal means of achieving SDM within the complexity of modern medicine is not yet certain.