The Global Anesthesia Workforce Survey: Updates and Trends in the Anesthesia Workforce.

BACKGROUND: There is a large global deficit of anesthesia providers. In 2016, the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA) conducted a survey to count the number of anesthesia providers worldwide. Much work has taken place since then to strengthen the anesthesia health workforce. This study updates the global count of anesthesia providers. METHODS: Between 2021 and 2023, an electronic survey was sent to national professional societies of physician anesthesia providers (PAPs), nurse anesthetists, and other nonphysician anesthesia providers (NPAPs). Data included number of providers and trainees, proportion of females, and limited intensive care unit (ICU) capacity data. Descriptive statistics were calculated by country, World Bank income group, and World Health Organization (WHO) region. Provider density is reported as the number of providers per 100,000 population. RESULTS: Responses were obtained for 172 of 193 United Nations (UN) member countries. The global provider density was 8.8 (PAP 6.6 NPAP 2.3). Seventy-six countries had a PAP density <5, whereas 66 countries had a total provider density <5. PAP density increased everywhere except for high- and low-income countries and the African region. CONCLUSIONS: The overall size of the global anesthesia workforce has increased over time, although some countries have experienced a decrease. Population growth and differences in which provider types that are counted can have an important impact on provider density. More work is needed to define appropriate metrics for measuring changes in density, to describe anesthesia cadres, and to improve workforce data collection processes. Effort to scale up anesthesia provider training must urgently continue.

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

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

Anesthesia Patient Safety: Next Steps to Improve Worldwide Perioperative Safety by 2030.

Patient safety is a core principle of anesthesia care worldwide. The specialty of anesthesiology has been a leader in medicine for the past half century in pursuing patient safety research and implementing standards of care and systematic improvements in processes of care. Together, these efforts have dramatically reduced patient harm associated with anesthesia. However, improved anesthesia patient safety has not been uniformly obtained worldwide. There are unique differences in patient safety outcomes between countries and regions in the world. These differences are often related to factors such as availability, support, and use of health care resources, trained personnel, patient safety outcome data collection efforts, standards of care, and cultures of safety and teamwork in health care facilities. This article provides insights from national anesthesia society leaders from 13 countries around the world. The countries they represent are diverse geographically and in health care resources. The authors share their countries' current and future initiatives in anesthesia patient safety. Ten major patient safety issues are common to these countries, with several of these focused on the importance of extending initiatives into the full perioperative as well as intraoperative environments. These issues may be used by anesthesia leaders around the globe to direct collaborative efforts to improve the safety of patients undergoing surgery and anesthesia in the coming decade.

Global surgery, obstetric, and anaesthesia indicator definitions and reporting: An Utstein consensus report.

BACKGROUND: Indicators to evaluate progress towards timely access to safe surgical, anaesthesia, and obstetric (SAO) care were proposed in 2015 by the Lancet Commission on Global Surgery. These aimed to capture access to surgery, surgical workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality rate, and catastrophic and impoverishing financial consequences of surgery. Despite being rapidly taken up by practitioners, data points from which to derive the indicators were not defined, limiting comparability across time or settings. We convened global experts to evaluate and explicitly define-for the first time-the indicators to improve comparability and support achievement of 2030 goals to improve access to safe affordable surgical and anaesthesia care globally. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The Utstein process for developing and reporting guidelines through a consensus building process was followed. In-person discussions at a 2-day meeting were followed by an iterative process conducted by email and virtual group meetings until consensus was reached. The meeting was held between June 16 to 18, 2019; discussions continued until August 2020. Participants consisted of experts in surgery, anaesthesia, and obstetric care, data science, and health indicators from high-, middle-, and low-income countries. Considering each of the 6 indicators in turn, we refined overarching descriptions and agreed upon data points needed for construction of each indicator at current time (basic data points), and as each evolves over 2 to 5 (intermediate) and >5 year (full) time frames. We removed one of the original 6 indicators (one of 2 financial risk protection indicators was eliminated) and refined descriptions and defined data points required to construct the 5 remaining indicators: geospatial access, workforce, surgical volume, perioperative mortality, and catastrophic expenditure. A strength of the process was the number of people from global institutes and multilateral agencies involved in the collection and reporting of global health metrics; a limitation was the limited number of participants from low- or middle-income countries-who only made up 21% of the total attendees. CONCLUSIONS: To track global progress towards timely access to quality SAO care, these indicators-at the basic level-should be implemented universally as soon as possible. Intermediate and full indicator sets should be achieved by all countries over time. Meanwhile, these evolutions can assist in the short term in developing national surgical plans and collecting more detailed data for research studies.

The COVID-19 Pandemic: Effects on Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is spreading rapidly around the world with devastating consequences on patients, health care workers, health systems, and economies. As it reaches low- and middle-income countries, its effects could be even more dire, because it will be difficult for them to respond aggressively to the pandemic. There is a great shortage of all health care providers, who will be at risk due to a lack of personal protection equipment. Social distancing will be almost impossible. The necessary resources to treat patients will be in short supply. The end result could be a catastrophic loss of life. A global effort will be required to support faltering economies and health care systems.

Ten years of the Helsinki Declaration on patient safety in anaesthesiology: An expert opinion on peri-operative safety aspects.

: Patient safety is an activity to mitigate preventable patient harm that may occur during the delivery of medical care. The European Board of Anaesthesiology (EBA)/European Union of Medical Specialists had previously published safety recommendations on minimal monitoring and postanaesthesia care, but with the growing public and professional interest it was decided to produce a much more encompassing document. The EBA and the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) published a consensus on what needs to be done/achieved for improvement of peri-operative patient safety. During the Euroanaesthesia meeting in Helsinki/Finland in 2010, this vision was presented to anaesthesiologists, patients, industry and others involved in health care as the 'Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology'. In May/June 2020, ESA and EBA are celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology; a good opportunity to look back and forward evaluating what was achieved in the recent 10 years, and what needs to be done in the upcoming years. The Patient Safety and Quality Committee (PSQC) of ESA invited experts in their fields to contribute, and these experts addressed their topic in different ways; there are classical, narrative reviews, more systematic reviews, political statements, personal opinions and also original data presentation. With this publication we hope to further stimulate implementation of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology, as well as initiating relevant research in the future.

The WFSA Global Anesthesia Workforce Survey.

BACKGROUND: Safe anesthesia and surgical care are not available when needed for 5 billion of the world's 7 billion people. There are major deficiencies in the specialist surgical workforce in many parts of the world, and specific data on the anesthesia workforce are lacking. METHODS: The World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists conducted a workforce survey during 2015 and 2016. The aim of the survey was to collect detailed information on physician anesthesia provider (PAP) and non-physician anesthesia provider (NPAP) numbers, distribution, and training. Data were categorized according to World Health Organization regional groups and World Bank income groups. RESULTS: We obtained information for 153 of 197 countries, representing 97.5% of the world's population. There were marked differences in the density of PAPs between World Health Organization regions and between World Bank income groups, ranging from 0 to over 20 PAP per 100,000 population. Seventy-seven countries reported a PAP density of <5, with particularly low densities in the African and South-East Asia regions. NPAPs make up a large part of the global anesthesia workforce, especially in countries with limited resources. Even when NPAPs are included, 70 countries had a total anesthesia provider density of <5 per 100,000. Using current population data, over 136,000 additional PAPs would be needed immediately to achieve a minimum density of 5 per 100,000 population in all countries. CONCLUSIONS: The World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists Global Anesthesia Workforce Survey is the most comprehensive study of the global anesthesia workforce to date. It is the first step in a process of ongoing data collection and longitudinal follow-up. The authors recommend an interim goal of at least 5 specialist physician anesthesia providers (anesthesiologists) per 100,000 population. A marked increase in training of PAPs and NPAPs will need to occur if we are to have any hope of achieving safe anesthesia for all by 2030.

The European Board of Anaesthesiology recommendations for safe medication practice: First update.

These European Board of Anaesthesiology (EBA) recommendations for safe medication practice replace the first edition of the EBA recommendations published in 2011. They were updated because evidence from critical incident reporting systems continues to show that medication errors remain a major safety issue in anaesthesia, intensive care, emergency medicine and pain medicine, and there is an ongoing need for relevant up-to-date clinical guidance for practising anaesthesiologists. The recommendations are based on evidence wherever possible, with a focus on patient safety, and are primarily aimed at anaesthesiologists practising in Europe, although many will be applicable elsewhere. They emphasise the importance of correct labelling practice and the value of incident reporting so that lessons can be learned, risks reduced and a safety culture developed.

The Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology: the past, present and future.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Four years after the launch of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology, it is of interest to assess its role in European and Global Patient Safety efforts. RECENT FINDINGS: The Declaration is widely supported, not only in Europe, but also has attracted much attention and support globally. In Europe, it represented a major step in European-wide patient safety networking and initiatives. The European Patient Safety Task Force, created jointly by the European Board of Anaesthesiology and the European Society of Anaesthesiology, has developed useful monitoring and introduction tools. A new Patient Safety Committee is being introduced, and this will facilitate current and future initiatives. SUMMARY: The launch of Helsinki Declaration of Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology in 2010 was a major step forward for patient safety initiatives in European and Global anesthesiology. Several steps have been taken in the 4 years that have passed, but the task needs continuous attention to ensure that every patient received the safest possible anesthesiology care.

A Multi-Country Survey on the Availability of Intraoperative Use of Echocardiography for Noncardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: This survey aimed to explore the availability and accessibility of echocardiography during noncardiac surgery worldwide. METHODS: An internet-based 45-item survey was sent, followed by reminders from August 30, 2021, to August 20, 2022. RESULTS: 1189 responses were received from 62 countries. Nearly seventy-one percent of respondents had intraoperatively used transesophageal or transthoracic echocardiography (TEE and TTE, respectively) for monitoring or examination. The unavailability of echocardiography machines (30.3%), lack of trained personnel (30.2%), and absence of clinical indications (22.6%) were the top 3 reasons for not using intraoperative echocardiography in noncardiac surgery. About 61.5% of participants had access to at least one echocardiography machine. About 41% had access to at least 1 TEE probe, and 62.2% had access to at least 1 TTE probe. Seventy-four percent of centers had a procedure to request intraoperative echocardiography if needed for noncardiac cases. Intraoperative echocardiography service was immediately available in 58% of centers. CONCLUSIONS: Echocardiography machines and skilled echocardiographers are still unavailable at many centers worldwide. National societies should aim to train a critical mass of certified TEE/TTE anesthesiologists and provide all anesthesiologists access to perioperative TEE/TTE machines in anesthesiology departments, considering the increasing number of older and sicker surgical patients scheduled for noncardiac surgery.