How Can Anesthesiologists Influence Policymaking? Reflections from a Year at the Council of Economic Advisers.

From September 2019 to August 2020, the author served as a senior economist on the Council of Economic Advisers, a government agency charged with providing economic analysis and advice to the President of the United States and senior government officials. Working with the Council yielded many useful lessons on how anesthesiologists can influence healthcare policy. First, because the President has wide latitude over many areas of health policy that directly impact patient care and anesthesiologists' working environment, anesthesiologists should focus their efforts on influencing policymakers within the executive branch of government in addition to influencing lawmakers. Second, policymakers are busy and typically do not have a technical background, so anesthesiologists must learn how to communicate with them succinctly and at an appropriate level. Finally, because policymakers often need analysis quickly, anesthesiologists must meet these needs even if the underlying analysis is rougher and less precise that what would normally be needed for peer review.

Regional anaesthesia: risk, consent and complications.

The risks of regional anaesthesia relate primarily to the technical nature of the procedure, chief among them being neurological. While rare, the direct relationship between nerve damage and the procedure itself means that patients need to be aware of this complication when consent is sought. In order to give valid consent, a patient must be informed. The extent of the information required has been defined by a 2015 legal ruling which established that the standard is the expectation of a reasonable patient, rather than the information deemed consequential by a reasonable doctor. The implications of this for clinicians are profound, and mean that the process of consent must, for example, include alternatives to the proposed treatment. Additionally, patients must have capacity and give their consent without coercion. Effective communication of risk can be challenging. As well as the barriers to comprehension that can result from language, literacy and numeracy, clinicians need to be aware of their own biases, often in favour of a regional anaesthetic approach. Patients also have biases, and doctors must be aware of these in order to best target their provision of information. Careful use of language and employing adjuncts such as information leaflets and visual aids can help to maximise the individual's autonomy. Particular care must be taken in special situations such as where patients have capacity issues or time is limited by the emergency nature of the intervention.

Descriptive Analysis of Federal and State Interventional Pain Malpractice Litigation in the United States: A Pilot Investigation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to examine and appreciate characteristics of malpractice lawsuits brought against interventional pain specialists. OBJECTIVES: To examine and appreciate characteristics of malpractice lawsuits brought against interventional pain specialists. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. SETTING: Jury verdicts and settlement reports of state and federal malpractice cases involving interventional pain practitioners from January 1, 1988, to January 1, 2018 were gathered from the Westlaw online legal database. METHODS: Jury verdicts and settlement reports of state and federal malpractice cases involving interventional pain practitioners from January 1, 1988, to January 1, 2018 were gathered from the Westlaw online legal database. Data collected for each case included year, state, patient age, patient gender, defendant specialty, legal outcome, award amount, alleged cause of malpractice, and factors in plaintiff's decision to file. After elimination of duplicates and applying inclusion/exclusion criteria to our initial search yielding over 1,500 cases, a total of 82 cases were included in this study. RESULTS: A total of 57.3% of cases resulted in a jury verdict in favor of the defendant, whereas 41.5% favored the plaintiff. When comparing cases that were performed in the operating room to cases performed outside the operating room, we found the jury verdicts to favor the plaintiff 83.3% of the time for operating room procedures (P = 0.003). In other words, interventional pain practitioners were more likely to be found at fault for complications from procedures performed in the operating room. To eliminate confounders, a logistical regression was performed and confirmed operating room procedures were an independent predictor of a verdict awarded to the plaintiff (P = 0.008). The median amount awarded to the plaintiff for all cases was $333,000, and the single highest award amount was $36,636,288. The median payout for operating room procedures was $450,000 (P = 0.010), which was significantly different from the median payout for nonoperating room procedures. Procedure categorization demonstrated a statistically significant difference in jury verdicts (P = 0.01411) and procedural error was the leading reason for pursuing litigation, followed by lack of informed consent and unnecessary procedure performed. LIMITATIONS: There is more than one database that captures medicolegal claims brought against practitioners. Westlaw, which has been previously utilized by other studies, is only one of them and the extent to which overlap exists in unclear. For each, data input are not necessarily consistent and data capture are not complete. As a result, there could exist a skew toward more severe complications and the details of individual cases likely vary. During data extraction, we found that all details of the procedure were not always included. For example, not all cases specified the type of injectate utilized for epidural injection (i.e., local anesthetic, steroid, mixture, and others) or route of injection (i.e., transforaminal vs. interlaminar). Moreover, as previously mentioned, cases that are settled out of court or finalized prior to trial are not necessarily reported by the Westlaw database, and therefore were not always included in our data search. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, interventional pain medicine physicians were favored by jury verdicts for malpractice claims. However, when filtering by procedure or setting, jury verdicts favored the plaintiff in some cases. KEY WORDS: Interventional pain, medical, malpractice, anesthesiology.

Informed Consent in Patients With Frailty Syndrome.

Frailty is present in more than 30% of individuals older than 65 years of age presenting for anesthesia and surgery, and poses a number of unique issues in the informed consent process. Much attention has been directed at the increased incidence of poor outcomes in these individuals, including postoperative mortality, complications, and prolonged length of stay. These material risks are not generally factored into conventional risk predictors, so it is likely that individuals with frailty are never fully informed of the true risk for procedures undertaken in the hospital setting. While the term "frailty" has the advantage of alerting to risk and allowing appropriate care and interventions, the term has the social disadvantage of encouraging objectivity to ageism. This may encourage paternalistic behavior from carers and family encroaching on self-determination and, in extreme cases, manifesting as coercion and compromising autonomy. There is a high prevalence of neurocognitive disorder in frail elderly patients, and care must be taken to identify those without capacity to provide informed consent; equally important is to not exclude those with capacity from providing consent. Obtaining consent for research adds an extra onus to that of clinical consent. The informed consent process in the frail elderly poses unique challenges to the busy clinical anesthesiologist. At the very least, an increased time commitment should be recognized. The gap between theoretical goals and actual practice of informed consent should be acknowledged.

Estructura de las unidades de cuidados intensivos de anestesia: recomendaciones de la Sección de Cuidados Intensivos de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología, Reanimación y Terapéutica del Dolor (SEDAR) / Structure of the anesthesia intensive care units: recommendations of the Intensive Care Section of the Spanish Society of Anaesthesiology

ANTECEDENTES Y OBJETIVO: Los objetivos de la Sección de Cuidados Intensivos de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología, Reanimación y Terapéutica del Dolor (SCI-SEDAR) con el presente trabajo son: establecer nuevas recomendaciones adaptando los estándares publicados por el Ministerio de Sanidad y Política Social, y alineadas con las principales guías internacionales, y desarrollar una herramienta de mejora de la calidad y la eficiencia. MATERIALES Y MÉTODO: A lo largo de 2018, 3 miembros de la SCI-SEDAR definieron la metodología, desarrollaron las recomendaciones y seleccionaron al panel de expertos. Debido a la limitada evidencia de buena parte de las recomendaciones y a la importante variabilidad estructural de las unidades de cuidados intensivos de anestesia actuales, se optó por un abordaje Delphi modificado para determinar el grado de consenso. RESULTADOS: Un total de 24 expertos de 21 instituciones constituyeron el grupo de expertos del presente trabajo. Se establecieron 175 recomendaciones sobre 8 apartados, incluyendo 129 con consenso fuerte y 46 con consenso débil. CONCLUSIONES: La SCI-SEDAR estableció las recomendaciones estructurales de las unidades de cuidados intensivos de anestesia que deberán guiar la renovación o la creación de nuevas unidades

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In this article, the Intensive Care Section of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology (SCI-SEDAR) establishes new recommendations based on the standards published by the Ministry of Health, Consumer Affairs and Social Welfare and aligned with the principle international guidelines, and develops a tool to improve quality and efficiency. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Over a 12-month period (2018), 3 members of the SCI-SEDAR defined the methodology, developed the recommendations and selected the panel of experts. Due to the limited evidence available for many of the recommendations and the significant structural differences between existing anesthesia intensive care units, we chose a modified Delphi approach to determine the degree of consensus. RESULTS: The panel consisted of 24 experts from 21 institutions. The group put forward 175 recommendations on 8 sections, including 129 with strong consensus and 46 with weak consensus. CONCLUSIONS: The SCI-SEDAR has established a series of structural recommendations that should be used when renovating or creating new anesthesia intensive care units

Facing internet fake-medicine and web para-pharmacy in the total absence of official recommendations from medical societies.

PURPOSE: Internet fake information, parapharmacy and counterfeit drugs are a market of hundreds of billion dollars. Misleading internet data decrease patients' compliance to medical care, promote use of questionable and detrimental practices, and jeopardize patient outcome. This is particularly harmful among cancer patients, especially when pain and nutritional aspects are considered. Provision of Web recommendations for the general audience (patients, relatives, general population) from official medical-providers might be useful to outweigh the detrimental internet information produced by non-medical providers. METHODS: 370 oncology and anesthesiology related societies were analyzed. Our objective was to evaluate the magnitude of web-recommendation for cancer cachexia and cancer pain for the general audience provided by official medical organizations' web sites at global level. RESULTS: Magnitude of web-recommendations at global level was surprisingly scant both for coverage and consistency. Seven official medical societies provided updated web-recommendation for cancer cachexia to their patients/family members, and 15 for cancer pain. Scantiness was unrelated by continent, developmental index, oncology tradition, economic-geographic area and society type scrutinized. CONCLUSIONS: Patients need expert advice when exposed to fake internet information largely dominated by paramedical market profits. In this era of "new media" the patients' net-education represents a new major educational challenge for medical societies.

Determination of legal responsibility in shared airway management between anesthesiology and otolaryngology.

BACKGROUND: Malpractice litigation remains an important point of contention in the United States. Airway management often sees multidisciplinary teams of anesthesiologists and otolaryngologists. This report analyzes lawsuits affecting both teams in airway management. METHODS: The Westlaw legal database (West Publishing Co., St. Paul, MN) was used to search for malpractice cases involving failed airway management, where both anesthesiology and otolaryngology were involved. RESULTS: Among the 28 cases analyzed, otolaryngology and anesthesiology were most commonly sued together (46.4%). When sued together, defendants were less likely to win and average award amounts ($4, 558 716) were higher. These cases most commonly occurred in the operating room (78.6%), involved a difficult/improper intubation (39.3%), alleged a failure to follow standard of care (57%), and resulted in death (60.7%). CONCLUSION: These cases primarily cited failure to follow standard of care and communication failures. Efforts should be directed toward multidisciplinary airway management protocols and effective communication.

Structure of the Anesthesia Intensive Care Units: Recommendations of the Intensive Care Section of the Spanish Society of Anaesthesiology. / Estructura de las unidades de cuidados intensivos de anestesia: recomendaciones de la Sección de Cuidados Intensivos de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología, Reanimación y Terapéutica del Dolor (SEDAR).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: In this article, the Intensive Care Section of the Spanish Society of Anesthesiology (SCI-SEDAR) establishes new recommendations based on the standards published by the Ministry of Health, Consumer Affairs and Social Welfare and aligned with the principle international guidelines, and develops a tool to improve quality and efficiency. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Over a 12-month period (2018), 3 members of the SCI-SEDAR defined the methodology, developed the recommendations and selected the panel of experts. Due to the limited evidence available for many of the recommendations and the significant structural differences between existing anesthesia intensive care units, we chose a modified Delphi approach to determine the degree of consensus. RESULTS: The panel consisted of 24 experts from 21 institutions. The group put forward 175 recommendations on 8 sections, including 129 with strong consensus and 46 with weak consensus. CONCLUSIONS: The SCI-SEDAR has established a series of structural recommendations that should be used when renovating or creating new anesthesia intensive care units.

Value-Based Payment in Ambulatory Anesthesia: MACRA, MIPS, and More.

Congress passed the Medicare Access and Chip Reauthorization Act of 2015 to replace the flawed sustainable growth rate system and it consolidates all pay-for-performance programs. These programs are intended to reduce health care costs but do not address the lack of funding for the social networks that (in all other developed countries) support better health and lower health care use and cost. These programs require reporting by providers about performance on quality, cost, and other metrics, leading to bonuses for those who exceed Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services-determined metrics and financial penalties for those who do not.

A Contemporary Analysis of Medicolegal Issues in Obstetric Anesthesia Between 2005 and 2015.

BACKGROUND: Detailed reviews of closed malpractice claims have provided insights into the most common events resulting in litigation and helped improve anesthesia care. In the past 10 years, there have been multiple safety advancements in the practice of obstetric anesthesia. We investigated the relationship among contributing factors, patient injuries, and legal outcome by analyzing a contemporary cohort of closed malpractice claims where obstetric anesthesiology was the principal defendant. METHODS: The Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO) is the captive medical liability insurer of the Harvard Medical Institutions that, in collaboration with other insurance companies and health care entities, contributes to the Comparative Benchmark System database for research purposes. We reviewed all (N = 106) closed malpractice cases related to obstetric anesthesia between 2005 and 2015 and compared the following classes of injury: maternal death and brain injury, neonatal death and brain injury, maternal nerve injury, and maternal major and minor injury. In addition, settled claims were compared to the cases that did not receive payment. χ, analysis of variance, Student t test, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for comparison between the different classes of injury. RESULTS: The largest number of claims, 54.7%, involved maternal nerve injury; 77.6% of these claims did not receive any indemnity payment. Cases involving maternal death or brain injury comprised 15.1% of all cases and were more likely to receive payment, especially in the high range (P = .02). The most common causes of maternal death or brain injury were high neuraxial blocks, embolic events, and failed intubation. Claims for maternal major and minor injury were least likely to receive payment (P = .02) and were most commonly (34.8%) associated with only emotional injury. Compared to the dropped/denied/dismissed claims, settled claims more frequently involved general anesthesia (P = .03), were associated with delays in care (P = .005), and took longer to resolve (3.2 vs 1.3 years; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Obstetric anesthesia remains an area of significant malpractice liability. Opportunities for practice improvement in the area of severe maternal injury include timely recognition of high neuraxial block, availability of adequate resuscitative resources, and the use of advanced airway management techniques. Anesthesiologists should avoid delays in maternal care, establish clear communication, and follow their institutional policy regarding neonatal resuscitation. Prevention of maternal neurological injury should be directed toward performing neuraxial techniques at the lowest lumbar spine level possible and prevention/recognition of retained neuraxial devices.

Informed consent for regional anesthesia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This narrative review describes the current framework for informed consent discussions for regional anesthesia practice from an ethical and medicolegal stand point as the cornerstone of the patient-physician relationship and the respect for patient autonomy. Recent guidelines and position statements from anesthesia societies have emphasized the importance of these discussions and their appropriate documentation. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have shown that patients want to know more about both common and benign, as well as rare but serious adverse events, as it relates to their anesthetic care. Several strategies have been recently recommended as a means to facilitate a meaningful consent discussion and proper documentation in the perioperative environment. SUMMARY: Defining the material risks of ultrasound-guided regional anesthetic procedures remains challenging, due in part to the difficulty in quantifying incidence rates of relatively rare events. However, well informed discussions are of great importance to support patient autonomy and lay a strong foundation for the patient-anesthesiologist relationship.

Value Proposition and Anesthesiology.

Health care in general and anesthesia in particular have seen dramatic changes in the economic landscape. It is vital if anesthesia groups wish to survive and prosper in this new environment to understand the changes occurring in health care and be flexible and proactive in taking on these challenges. More than ever anesthesia groups must be good corporate citizens and seek ways in which to enhance their value to the organization, whether in the operating room or out of operating room locations, and be a proactive partner with the hospital.

The future of nonoperating room anesthesia in the 21st century: emphasis on quality and safety.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) has grown from an insignificant percentage of total anesthesia cases into a major percentage of anesthesia workload over the past 30 years. This trend evidences no signs of abating. RECENT FINDINGS: With the rapid development of novel interventional techniques in cardiology, radiology, gastroenterology and pulmonary medicine and other areas, the core responsibilities of the anesthesia provider will no longer be confined to delivering care in traditional operating rooms. This change presents challenges for the profession on several fronts. Efficient staffing of multiple locations poses challenges. The demand for anesthesia services continues to increase, but underutilization is a major problem. Each clinical area presents unique patient care issues. New interventional techniques are continually developed with which anesthesiologists need to be familiar in each specific area. NORA patients are older and medically complex, yet many are treated on an outpatient basis. Consequently, anesthetic management for NORA will of necessity require techniques that allow patients to recover quickly. SUMMARY: It may be anticipated that in the next decade that NORA cases will constitute over 50% of the number of cases performed with anesthesia involvement. As the last century belonged to invasive surgery, the next century will belong to interventionalists. There is also an increasing national emphasis on quality measurement and metrics reporting. Future anesthesia payment models under Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act, such as merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS), emphasize various process and outcomes measures. Anesthesiologists will be evaluated based on a composite performance score consisting of four components: quality, resource use, clinical practice improvement activities and meaningful use of certified electronic health record technology.

In response to the letter by Cabadas and Álvarez-Escudero about the editorial: 'Will societies of anesthesiologists partake in the take-off of non-anesthesiologist administration of propofol?'

No disponible