Preprocedural assessments are used by anesthesia providers to optimize perioperative care for patients undergoing invasive procedures | Anesthesia & Analgesia
When these assessments are performed in advance by providers who are not caring for the patient during the procedure, there is an additional layer of complexity in ensuring that the workup meets the needs of the primary anesthesia care team. In this study, anesthesia providers were asked to rate the quality of preprocedural assessments prepared by other providers to evaluate anesthesia care team
The overwhelming majority of preprocedural assessments performed at our institution were considered satisfactory or exemplary by day-of-surgery anesthesia providers. This was demonstrated by both the case-by-case ratings and midpoint survey. However, the perceived frequency of “unsatisfactory” evaluations was worse when providers were asked to reflect on the quality of preprocedural evaluations generally versus rate them individually. Analysis of comments left by providers allowed us to identify specific and actionable areas for improvement. This method can be used by other institutions to identify systemic deficiencies in the preprocedural evaluation process.
Full reference: Manji, F. et al. (2017) Measuring and Improving the Quality of Preprocedural Assessments. Anesthesia & Analgesia. 124(6 ) pp. 1846–1854
According to data presented at the 2017 annual meeting of the Society for Technology in Anesthesia, implementation of a hospital-based quality improvement program (QIP) was shown to reduce respiratory-related events after only one year | Clinical Anesthesiology
Although the program did not lead to changes in PSI-11 (Patient Safety Indicator 11), ICU transfers or mortality, continuous monitoring with capnography and pulse oximetry was associated with reductions in postoperative respiratory failure, cardiac arrest/resuscitation events and length of stay from a respiratory event.
“We implemented this program because it was the right thing to do for our patients,” said Christine O’Farrell, BSN, CPHQ, CPHRM, director of quality management for Barton Healthcare, in South Lake Tahoe, Calif., “but these data suggest that continuous monitoring with both capnography and pulse oximetry may improve quality by reducing severe respiratory adverse events and length of stay for high-risk patients.”
Read the full overview here
Walker, E.M.K. et al. (2016) British Journal of Anaesthesia. 117 (6) pp. 758-766.
Background. Understanding the patient perspective on healthcare is central to the evaluation of quality. This study measured selected patient-reported outcomes after anaesthesia in order to identify targets for research and quality improvement.
Conclusions. Anxiety and discomfort after surgery are common; despite this, satisfaction with anaesthesia care in the UK is high. The inconsistent relationship between patient-reported outcome, patient experience and patient satisfaction supports using all three of these domains to provide a comprehensive assessment of the quality of anaesthesia care.
Read the full abstract here