Perspectives on Anesthesia and Perioperative Patient Safety: Past, Present, and Future.

During the past 70 years, patient safety science has evolved through four organizational frameworks known as Safety-0, Safety -1, Safety-2, and Safety-3. Their evolution reflects the realization over time that blaming people, chasing errors, fixing one-offs, and regulation would not create the desired patient safety. In Safety-0, the oldest framework, harm events arise from clinician failure; event prevention relies on better staffing, education, and basic standards. In Safety-1, used by hospitals, harm events arise from individual and/or system failures. Safety is improved through analytics, workplace culture, high reliability principles, technology, and quality improvement. Safety-2 emphasizes clinicians' adaptability to prevent harm events in an everchanging environment, using resilience engineering principles. Safety-3, used by aviation, adds system design and control elements to Safety-1 and Safety-2, deploying human factors, design-thinking, and operational control or feedback to prevent and respond to harm events. Safety-3 represents a potential way for anesthesia and perioperative care to become safer.

A Process-Based Standardization of an Intraoperative Escalation Protocol in Anesthesiology.

Prompt recognition and management of critical events is pivotal for the provision of safe anesthetic care. This requires a well-functioning team that focuses on effective communication, timely decision-making, and escalation of potential complications. We believe that variation in bedside care leads to "near-misses," adverse outcomes, and serious safety events (SSEs). The principles of an escalation culture have been used successfully in other highly reliable industries such as aviation, military, and manufacturing. We discuss here the introduction of a unique and compelling thought-process for developing an intraoperative escalation protocol that is specifically tailored for our institution. Inspired by a critical intraoperative event, this departmental protocol was developed based on an analysis of multispecialty literature and expert opinion to decrease the incidence of SSEs. It includes a stepwise approach and incorporates patient-specific information to guide team members who encounter dynamic clinical situations. The implementation of the protocol has facilitated continuous quality improvement through iterative education, improving communication, and enhancing decision-making. Concurrently, we have plans to incorporate technology and electronic decision support tools to enhance real-time communication, monitor performance, and foster a culture of safety.

The Accuracy of the Learning-Curve Cumulative Sum Method in Assessing Brachial Plexus Block Competency.

BACKGROUND: The learning-curve cumulative sum method (LC-CUSUM) and its risk-adjusted form (RA-LC-CUSUM) have been proposed as performance-monitoring methods to assess competency during the learning phase of procedural skills. However, scarce data exist about the method's accuracy. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of LC-CUSUM forms using historical data consisting of sequences of successes and failures in brachial plexus blocks (BPBs) performed by anesthesia residents. METHODS: Using historical data from 1713 BPB performed by 32 anesthesia residents, individual learning curves were constructed using the LC-CUSUM and RA-LC-CUSUM methods. A multilevel logistic regression model predicted the procedure-specific risk of failure incorporated in the RA-LC-CUSUM calculations. Competency was defined as a maximum 15% cumulative failure rate and was used as the reference for determining the accuracy of both methods. RESULTS: According to the LC-CUSUM method, 22 residents (84.61%) attained competency after a median of 18.5 blocks (interquartile range [IQR], 14-23), while the RA-LC-CUSUM assigned competency to 20 residents (76.92%) after a median of 17.5 blocks (IQR, 14-25, P = .001). The median failure rate at reaching competency was 6.5% (4%-9.75%) under the LC-CUSUM and 6.5% (4%-9%) for the RA-LC-CUSUM method ( P = .37). The sensitivity of the LC-CUSUM (85%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-98%) was similar to the RA-LC-CUSUM method (77%; 95% CI, 61%-93%; P = .15). Identical specificity values were found for both methods (67%; 95% CI, 29%-100%, P = 1). CONCLUSIONS: The LC-CUSUM and RA-LC-CUSUM methods were associated with substantial false-positive and false-negative rates. Also, small lower limits for the 95% CIs around the accuracy measures were observed, indicating that the methods may be inaccurate for high-stakes decisions about resident competency at BPBs.

Gender Differences in Authorship and Quality of Anesthesia Clinical Practice Guidelines From 2016 to 2020 Using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II Instrument.

INTRODUCTION: Women continue to be underrepresented in academic anesthesiology. This study assessed guidelines in anesthesia journals over the past 5 years, evaluating differences in woman-led versus man-led guidelines in terms of author gender, quality, and changes over time. We hypothesized that anesthesia guidelines would be predominately man-led, and that there would be differences in quality between woman-led versus man-led guidelines. METHODS: All clinical practice guidelines published in the top 10 anesthesia journals were identified as per Clarivate Analytics Impact Factor between 2016 and 2020. Fifty-one guidelines were included for author, gender, and quality analysis using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Each guideline was assessed across 6 domains and 23 items and given an overall score, overall quality score, and overall rating/recommendation. Stratified and trend analyses were performed for woman-led versus man-led guidelines. RESULTS: Fifty out of 51 guidelines were included: 1 was excluded due to unidentifiable first-author gender. In total, 255 of 1052 (24%) authors were women, and woman-led guidelines (woman-first author) represented 12 of 50 (24%) overall guidelines. Eighteen percent (9 of 50) of guidelines had all-male authors, and a majority (26 of 50, 52%) had less than one-third of female authors. The overall number and percentage of woman-led guidelines did not change over time. There was a significantly higher percentage of female authors in woman-led versus man-led guidelines, median 39% vs 20% ( P = .012), as well as a significantly higher number of female coauthors in guidelines that were woman-led median 3.5 vs 1.0, P = .049. For quality, there was no significant difference in the overall rating or objective quality of woman- versus man-led guidelines. However, there was a significant increase in the overall rating of all the guidelines over time ( P = .010), driven by the increase in overall rating among man-led guidelines, P = .002. The overall score of guidelines did not increase over time; however, they increased in man-led but not woman-led guidelines. There was no significant correlation between the percentage of female authors per guideline and either overall score or overall rating. CONCLUSIONS: There is a substantial disparity in the number of women leading and contributing to guidelines which has not improved over time. Woman-led guidelines included more women and a higher percentage of women. There was no difference in quality of guidelines by first-author gender or percentage of female authors. Further systematic and quota-driven sponsorship is needed to promote gender equity, diversity, and inclusion in anesthesia guidelines.

Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia Updated Consensus Statement on Perioperative Blood Glucose Management in Adult Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Undergoing Ambulatory Surgery.

This consensus statement is a comprehensive update of the 2010 Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA) Consensus Statement on perioperative blood glucose management in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing ambulatory surgery. Since the original consensus guidelines in 2010, several novel therapeutic interventions have been introduced to treat DM, including new hypoglycemic agents and increasing prevalence of insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors. The updated recommendations were developed by an expert task force under the provision of SAMBA and are based on a comprehensive review of the literature from 1980 to 2022. The task force included SAMBA members with expertise on this topic and those contributing to the primary literature regarding the management of DM in the perioperative period. The recommendations encompass preoperative evaluation of patients with DM presenting for ambulatory surgery, management of preoperative oral hypoglycemic agents and home insulins, intraoperative testing and treatment modalities, and blood glucose management in the postanesthesia care unit and transition to home after surgery. High-quality evidence pertaining to perioperative blood glucose management in patients with DM undergoing ambulatory surgery remains sparse. Recommendations are therefore based on recent guidelines and available literature, including general glucose management in patients with DM, data from inpatient surgical populations, drug pharmacology, and emerging treatment data. Areas in need of further research are also identified. Importantly, the benefits and risks of interventions and clinical practice information were considered to ensure that the recommendations maintain patient safety and are clinically valid and useful in the ambulatory setting. What Other Guidelines Are Available on This Topic? Since the publication of the SAMBA Consensus Statement for perioperative blood glucose management in the ambulatory setting in 2010, several recent guidelines have been issued by the American Diabetes Association (ADA), the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), the Endocrine Society, the Centre for Perioperative Care (CPOC), and the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (AAGBI) on DM care in hospitalized patients; however, none are specific to ambulatory surgery. How Does This Guideline Differ From the Previous Guidelines? Previously posed clinical questions that were outdated were revised to reflect current clinical practice. Additional questions were developed relating to the perioperative management of patients with DM to include the newer therapeutic interventions.

Development and implementation of local pediatric anesthesia performance metrics at a Canadian children's hospital: a technical report.

PURPOSE: In this project, we sought to develop and implement pediatric anesthesia metrics into electronic health records (EHR) in a hospital setting to improve quality and safety of patient care. While there has been an upsurge in metric-driven health care, specific metrics catering to pediatric anesthesia remain lacking despite widespread use of EHR. The rapid proliferation and implementation of EHR presents opportunities to develop and implement metrics appropriate to local patient care, in this case pediatric anesthesia, with the strategic goal of enhancing quality and safety of patient care, while also delivering transparency in reporting of such metrics. CLINICAL FEATURES: Using a quasi-nominal consensus group design, we collected requirements from attending anesthesiologists using Agile methodology. Forty-five metrics addressing quality of care (e.g., induction experience, anesthesia delivery, unanticipated events, and postanesthetic care unit stay) and provider performance (e.g., bundle-compliance, collaboration, skills assurance) were developed. Implementation involved integration into the EHR followed by transition from PDF-based feedback to interactive Power BI (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) dashboards. CONCLUSION: We introduced and implemented customized pediatric anesthesia metrics within an academic pediatric hospital; however, this framework is easily adaptable across multiple clinical specialties and institutions. In harnessing data-collecting and reporting properties of EHR, the metrics we describe provide insights that facilitate real-time monitoring and foster a culture of continuous learning in line with strategic goals of high-reliability organizations.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Dans le cadre de ce projet, nous avons cherché à développer et à mettre en œuvre des mesures d'anesthésie pédiatrique dans les dossiers de santé électroniques (DSE) en milieu hospitalier afin d'améliorer la qualité et la sécurité des soins aux patient·es. Bien qu'il y ait eu une recrudescence des soins de santé guidés par les procédures d'évaluation, les mesures spécifiques à l'anesthésie pédiatrique restent insuffisantes malgré l'utilisation généralisée du DSE. La prolifération et la mise en œuvre rapides des DSE offrent des possibilités d'élaborer et de mettre en œuvre des paramètres appropriés aux soins locaux aux patient·es, dans ce cas-ci en anesthésie pédiatrique, dans le but stratégique d'améliorer la qualité et la sécurité des soins tout en assurant la transparence des communications concernant ces paramètres. CARACTéRISTIQUES CLINIQUES: À l'aide d'un modèle de groupe consensuel quasi nominal, nous avons recueilli les exigences des anesthésiologistes traitant·es à l'aide de la méthodologie Agile. Quarante-cinq paramètres portant sur la qualité des soins (p. ex., l'expérience d'induction, l'administration de l'anesthésie, les événements imprévus et le séjour en salle de réveil) et la productivité des prestataires (p. ex., l'observance des forfaits, la collaboration, l'assurance des compétences) ont été élaborés. La mise en œuvre a impliqué l'intégration dans le DSE, suivie de la transition des commentaires en format PDF vers les tableaux de bord interactifs Power BI (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, États-Unis). CONCLUSION: Nous avons introduit et mis en œuvre des mesures personnalisées de l'anesthésie pédiatrique au sein d'un hôpital pédiatrique universitaire. Cependant, ce cadre est facilement adaptable à de multiples spécialités cliniques et institutions. Parce qu'elles exploitent les propriétés de collecte de données et de communications du DSE, les mesures que nous décrivons fournissent des informations qui facilitent la surveillance en temps réel et favorisent une culture d'apprentissage continu conforme aux objectifs stratégiques des organisations à haute fiabilité.

Comparison of societal guidance on perioperative management of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: implications for clinical practice and future investigations.

PURPOSE: The use of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (RAs) by patients undergoing surgery and procedures requiring anesthesia has become a topic of significant concern for perioperative providers because of the potential increased risk of aspiration resulting from the medication's effect of delaying gastric emptying. There is currently a lack of high-quality data regarding the safety of GLP-1 RAs in patients undergoing surgery, which has led to variations in practice. SOURCE: We performed an internet search of society-endorsed statements and guidelines related to perioperative management of GLP-1 RAs, focusing on the top 20 countries with the largest anesthesiology societies determined by membership data from the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists. We excluded articles and websites that were not in English. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Our search revealed endorsed statements from fourteen major anesthesiology, endocrinology, and gastroenterology societies. There was considerable variation between societies in the recommendations and guidance for withholding these medications before surgery, the duration of withholding, assessment of the need for avoiding deep sedation or general anesthesia, use of rapid sequence intubation, need for prolonged fasting periods and clear fluid before a nil per os period, recognition of signs and symptoms for aspiration risk, the management of glucose in the perioperative period, and the use of point-of-care ultrasound for risk assessment. CONCLUSION: Society-endorsed statements and guidelines provide varying recommendations on the perioperative management of GLP-1 RAs. The insights gained from this comparative analysis may help guide clinical practice, develop institutional practice guidelines, and direct future research efforts.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'utilisation d'agonistes des récepteurs (AR) du peptide-1 de type glucagon (GLP-1) par les personnes bénéficiant d'une intervention chirurgicale et de procédures nécessitant une anesthésie est devenue un sujet de préoccupation important pour les prestataires de soins périopératoires en raison de l'augmentation du risque potentiel d'aspiration résultant de l'effet du médicament, qui provoque un retard de la vidange gastrique. Il existe actuellement un manque de données de haute qualité concernant l'innocuité des AR GLP-1 chez les patient·es bénéficiant d'une intervention chirurgicale, ce qui a mené à des variations dans la pratique. SOURCES: Nous avons réalisé une recherche sur Internet des déclarations et lignes directrices approuvées par les sociétés médicales concernant la prise en charge périopératoire des AR GLP-1, en nous concentrant sur les 20 pays comptant les plus grandes sociétés d'anesthésiologie, déterminées par les données sur les membres de la Fédération mondiale des sociétés d'anesthésiologistes. Nous avons exclu les articles et les sites Web qui n'étaient pas en anglais. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Nos recherches ont révélé des déclarations approuvées par quatorze grandes sociétés d'anesthésiologie, d'endocrinologie et de gastro-entérologie. Il y avait des variations considérables entre les sociétés en matière de recommandations et de directives concernant l'abstention de ces médicaments avant la chirurgie, la durée de l'abstention, l'évaluation de la nécessité d'éviter la sédation profonde ou l'anesthésie générale, l'utilisation de l'intubation en séquence rapide, la nécessité de périodes de jeûne prolongées et de liquides clairs avant une période nil per os, la reconnaissance des signes et symptômes du risque d'aspiration, la prise en charge de la glycémie pendant la période périopératoire et l'utilisation de l'échographie ciblée pour l'évaluation des risques. CONCLUSION: Les déclarations et les lignes directrices approuvées par les sociétés médicales fournissent des recommandations variées sur la prise en charge périopératoire des AR GLP-1. Les connaissances acquises grâce à cette analyse comparative pourraient aider à orienter la pratique clinique, à élaborer des lignes directrices de pratique institutionnelles et à guider les efforts de recherche futurs.

Does higher performance in a national licensing examination predict better quality of care? A longitudinal observational study of Ethiopian anesthetists.

BACKGROUND: Ethiopia made a national licensing examination (NLE) for associate clinician anesthetists a requirement for entry into the practice workforce. However, there is limited empirical evidence on whether the NLE scores of associate clinicians predict the quality of health care they provide in low-income countries. This study aimed to assess the association between anesthetists' NLE scores and three selected quality of patient care indicators. METHODS: A multicenter longitudinal observational study was conducted between January 8 and February 7, 2023, to collect quality of care (QoC) data on surgical patients attended by anesthetists (n = 56) who had taken the Ethiopian anesthetist NLE since 2019. The three QoC indicators were standards for safe anesthesia practice, critical incidents, and patient satisfaction. The medical records of 991 patients were reviewed to determine the standards for safe anesthesia practice and critical incidents. A total of 400 patients responded to the patient satisfaction survey. Multivariable regressions were employed to determine whether the anesthetist NLE score predicted QoC indicators. RESULTS: The mean percentage of safe anesthesia practice standards met was 69.14%, and the mean satisfaction score was 85.22%. There were 1,120 critical incidents among 911 patients, with three out of five experiencing at least one. After controlling for patient, anesthetist, facility, and clinical care-related confounding variables, the NLE score predicted the occurrence of critical incidents. For every 1% point increase in the total NLE score, the odds of developing one or more critical incidents decreased by 18% (aOR = 0.82; 95% CI = 0.70 = 0.96; p = 0.016). No statistically significant associations existed between the other two QoC indicators and NLE scores. CONCLUSION: The NLE score had an inverse relationship with the occurrence of critical incidents, supporting the validity of the examination in assessing graduates' ability to provide safe and effective care. The lack of an association with the other two QoC indicators requires further investigation. Our findings may help improve education quality and the impact of NLEs in Ethiopia and beyond.

Pediatric anesthesia in Europe: Variations within uniformity.

Organization of healthcare strongly differs between European countries and results in country-specific requirements in postgraduate medical training. Within the European Union (EU), the European Board of Anaesthesiology has set recommendations of training for the Specialty of Anaesthesiology including standards for Postgraduate Medical Specialist training including a description for providing service in pediatric anesthesia. However, these standards are advisory and not mandatory. Here we aimed to review the current state and associated challenges of pediatric anesthesia training in Europe. We report an important country-specific variability both in training and regulations of practice of pediatric anesthesia in the EU and in the United Kingdom. The requirements for training in pediatric anesthesia varies between nothing specified (Belgium) or providing anesthesia with direct supervision to a minimum of 50 cases below 5 years of age (Germany) to 3-6 month clinical practice in a specialized pediatric hospital (France). Likewise, the regulations for providing anesthesia to children varies from no regulations at all (Belgium) to age specific requirements and centralization of all children below 4 years of age to specified centers (United Kingdom). Officially recognized pediatric anesthesia fellowship programs are not available in most countries of Europe. It remains unclear if and how country-specific differences in pediatric anesthesia training are associated with clinical outcomes in pediatric perioperative care. There is converging interest and support for the establishment of a European pediatric anesthesia curriculum.

Intraoperative haemodynamic monitoring and management of adults having non-cardiac surgery: Guidelines of the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine in collaboration with the German Association of the Scientific Medical Societies.

Haemodynamic monitoring and management are cornerstones of perioperative care. The goal of haemodynamic management is to maintain organ function by ensuring adequate perfusion pressure, blood flow, and oxygen delivery. We here present guidelines on "Intraoperative haemodynamic monitoring and management of adults having non-cardiac surgery" that were prepared by 18 experts on behalf of the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Anästhesiologie und lntensivmedizin; DGAI).

What are standard monitoring devices for anesthesia in future?

Monitoring the patient's physiological functions is critical in clinical anesthesia. The latest version of the Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists' Guidelines for Safe Anesthesia Monitoring, revised in 2019, covers various factors, including electroencephalogram monitoring, oxygenation, ventilation, circulation, and muscle relaxation. However, with recent advances in monitoring technologies, the information provided has become more detailed, requiring practitioners to update their knowledge. At a symposium organized by the Journal of Anesthesia in 2023, experts across five fields discussed their respective topics: anesthesiologists need to interpret not only the values displayed on processed electroencephalogram monitors but also raw electroencephalogram data in the foreseeable future. In addition to the traditional concern of preventing hypoxemia, monitoring for potential hyperoxemia and the effects of mechanical ventilation itself will become increasingly important. The importance of using AI analytics to predict hypotension, assess nociception, and evaluate microcirculation may increase. With the recent increase in the availability of neuromuscular monitoring devices in Japan, it is important for anesthesiologists to become thoroughly familiar with the features of each device to ensure its effective use. There is a growing desire to develop and introduce a well-organized, integrated "single screen" monitor.

Comparing ChatGPT and a Single Anesthesiologist's Responses to Common Patient Questions: An Exploratory Cross-Sectional Survey of a Panel of Anesthesiologists.

Increased patient access to electronic medical records and resources has resulted in higher volumes of health-related questions posed to clinical staff, while physicians' rising clinical workloads have resulted in less time for comprehensive, thoughtful responses to patient questions. Artificial intelligence chatbots powered by large language models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT could help anesthesiologists efficiently respond to electronic patient inquiries, but their ability to do so is unclear. A cross-sectional exploratory survey-based study comprised of 100 anesthesia-related patient question/response sets based on two fictitious simple clinical scenarios was performed. Each question was answered by an independent board-certified anesthesiologist and ChatGPT (GPT-3.5 model, August 3, 2023 version). The responses were randomized and evaluated via survey by three blinded board-certified anesthesiologists for various quality and empathy measures. On a 5-point Likert scale, ChatGPT received similar overall quality ratings (4.2 vs. 4.1, p = .81) and significantly higher overall empathy ratings (3.7 vs. 3.4, p < .01) compared to the anesthesiologist. ChatGPT underperformed the anesthesiologist regarding rate of responses in agreement with scientific consensus (96.6% vs. 99.3%, p = .02) and possibility of harm (4.7% vs. 1.7%, p = .04), but performed similarly in other measures (percentage of responses with inappropriate/incorrect information (5.7% vs. 2.7%, p = .07) and missing information (10.0% vs. 7.0%, p = .19)). In conclusion, LLMs show great potential in healthcare, but additional improvement is needed to decrease the risk of patient harm and reduce the need for close physician oversight. Further research with more complex clinical scenarios, clinicians, and live patients is necessary to validate their role in healthcare.

Beyond adverse events in anesthesiology: 'unanticipated events' and strategies for improved reporting.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Patient safety in anesthesiology has advanced significantly over the past several decades. The current process of improving care is often based on studying adverse events (AEs) and near misses. However, there is a wealth of information not captured by focusing solely on these events, potentially resulting in missed opportunities for care improvements. RECENT FINDINGS: We review terms such as AEs and nonroutine events (NREs), and introduce the concept of unanticipated events (UEs), defined as events that deviate from intended care that may/may not have been caused by error, may/may not be preventable, and may/may not have caused injury to a patient. UEs incorporate AEs in addition to many other anesthetic events not routinely tracked, allowing for trend analysis over time and the identification of additional opportunities for quality improvement. We review both automated and self-reporting tools that currently exist to capture this often-neglected wealth of data. Finally, we discuss the responsibility of quality/safety leaders for data monitoring. SUMMARY: Consistent reporting and monitoring for trends related to UEs could allow departments to identify risks and mitigate harm before it occurs. We review various proposed methods to expand data collection, and recommend anesthesia practices pursue UE tracking through department-specific reporting interfaces.

Safety amid the scalpels: creating psychological safety in the operating room.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: We briefly review the concept of psychological safety and discuss the actions that can create it in the anesthesiologist's work environment. RECENT FINDINGS: The interest in psychological safety has grown in popularity since the publication of Amy Edmondson's book The Fearless Organization in 2018. While the concept and its benefits are described in the healthcare literature, the specific actions necessary to create it are often not. SUMMARY: To ensure patient safety, we want members of the teams we lead to be comfortable sharing emerging problems that they see before we become aware of them. As educators, we want trainees to approach us when they do not understand something and openly participate and contribute without the fear of how others will perceive them. These scenarios require an environment of psychological safety - the ability to ask for help, admit mistakes, and be respectfully forthright with unpopular beliefs without the fear of being ostracized or ignored. Methods for creating an environment of psychological safety will be discussed.

The electronic health record: does it enhance or distract from patient safety?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The electronic health record (EHR) is an invaluable tool that may be used to improve patient safety. With a variety of different features, such as clinical decision support and computerized physician order entry, it has enabled improvement of patient care throughout medicine. EHR allows for built-in reminders for such items as antibiotic dosing and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis. RECENT FINDINGS: In anesthesiology, EHR often improves patient safety by eliminating the need for reliance on manual documentation, by facilitating information transfer and incorporating predictive models for such items as postoperative nausea and vomiting. The use of EHR has been shown to improve patient safety in specific metrics such as using checklists or information transfer amongst clinicians; however, limited data supports that it reduces morbidity and mortality. SUMMARY: There are numerous potential pitfalls associated with EHR use to improve patient safety, as well as great potential for future improvement.

The role of human factors engineering in patient safety.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To explore the collaboration between human factors (HFs) experts and clinicians in order to improve perioperative patient safety. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent recommendations to integrate human factors into anesthesia in the United Kingdom emphasizes the value of applying disciplines outside of medicine to optimize the patient experience. SUMMARY: Human factors engineering is underutilized worldwide. Patient safety would benefit from collaboration with HF experts to design resilient systems. Healthcare organizations must consider HF to develop and implement user-centered solutions to improve safety for patients and professionals.

Machine learning: implications and applications for ambulatory anesthesia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review explores the timely and relevant applications of machine learning in ambulatory anesthesia, focusing on its potential to optimize operational efficiency, personalize risk assessment, and enhance patient care. RECENT FINDINGS: Machine learning models have demonstrated the ability to accurately forecast case durations, Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) lengths of stay, and risk of hospital transfers based on preoperative patient and procedural factors. These models can inform case scheduling, resource allocation, and preoperative evaluation. Additionally, machine learning can standardize assessments, predict outcomes, improve handoff communication, and enrich patient education. SUMMARY: Machine learning has the potential to revolutionize ambulatory anesthesia practice by optimizing efficiency, personalizing care, and improving quality and safety. However, limitations such as algorithmic opacity, data biases, reproducibility issues, and adoption barriers must be addressed through transparent, participatory design principles and ongoing validation to ensure responsible innovation and incremental adoption.

Point-of-care ultrasound in pediatric anesthesiology: considerations for training and credentialing.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss considerations surrounding the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in pediatric anesthesiology. RECENT FINDINGS: POCUS is an indispensable tool in various medical specialties, including pediatric anesthesiology. Credentialing for POCUS should be considered to ensure that practitioners are able to acquire images, interpret them correctly, and use ultrasound to guide procedures safely and effectively. In the absence of formal guidelines for anesthesiology, current practice and oversight varies by institution. In this review, we will explore the significance of POCUS in pediatric anesthesiology, discuss credentialing, and compare the specific requirements and challenges currently associated with using POCUS in pediatric anesthesia. SUMMARY: Point-of-care ultrasound is being utilized by the pediatric anesthesiologist and has the potential to improve patient assessment, procedure guidance, and decision-making. Guidelines increase standardization and quality assurance procedures help maintain high-quality data. Credentialing standards for POCUS in pediatric anesthesiology are essential to ensure that practitioners have the necessary skills and knowledge to use this technology effectively and safely. Currently, there are no national pediatric POCUS guidelines to base credentialing processes on for pediatric anesthesia practices. Further work directed at establishing pediatric-specific curriculum goals and competency standards are needed to train current and future pediatric anesthesia providers and increase overall acceptance of POCUS use.

Preventing perioperative infections: a call to action for anesthesiologists.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Surgical site infections (SSI) are one of the most costly complications and hospital organizations are promoting multidisciplinary approaches to address this harm. Anesthesiologists are increasingly recognized as key players influencing surgical outcomes and patient safety, and play a key role in preventing SSIs. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent guidelines and strategies to prevent SSI are focused on the areas which anesthesiologists can impact including antimicrobial prophylaxis, proper hand hygiene, decontamination of environmental surfaces and operating room equipment coming in direct contact with patients. SUMMARY: Timely interventions, including appropriate antibiotics' administration, practicing sterile and aseptic techniques when performing intraoperative procedures and handling medications are impactful steps in the process of improving rates of SSIs. Multidisciplinary participation in local and regional collaborative initiatives to improve adherence to best practices as well as integrated education of all the stakeholders are some of the principles of patient-centered care described in our review.

Dental sedation permit requirements for physician anesthesiologists in the United States and the European Union: a review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review addresses the dental sedation permit requirements for physician anesthesiologists in the United States and the European Union (EU). The regulatory landscape for office-based anesthesia, including dental settings, is often described as the 'Wild West' of patient safety, making it crucial to outline the similarities and differences in dental anesthesia regulations and offer practical guidelines for regulators. RECENT FINDINGS: There is virtually no literature that addresses the issue of dental sedation permits for physicians. By summarizing the variation in language and terminology from state to state, this review highlights the inconsistencies and gaps in dental regulations. The review also highlights the limited specific guidance on the permit process for physicians administering dental anesthesia. SUMMARY: By comparing dental anesthesia regulations and guidelines across all U.S. states and the EU, the review aims to offer practical guidelines for regulators to institute an oversight process that is fair to physician anesthesiologists and does not impede their ability to practice in the dental office setting. This framework for credentialing and permitting physicians in dental office-based anesthesia settings is informed by existing safety recommendations and best practices.