Literature DB >> 16436839

Injury and liability associated with monitored anesthesia care: a closed claims analysis.

Sanjay M Bhananker1, Karen L Posner, Frederick W Cheney, Robert A Caplan, Lorri A Lee, Karen B Domino.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To assess the patterns of injury and liability associated with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) compared with general and regional anesthesia, the authors reviewed closed malpractice claims in the American Society of Anesthesiologists Closed Claims Database since 1990.
METHODS: All surgical anesthesia claims associated with MAC (n = 121) were compared with those associated with general (n = 1,519) and regional (n = 312) anesthesia. A detailed analysis of MAC claims was performed to identify causative mechanisms and liability patterns.
RESULTS: MAC claims involved older and sicker patients compared with general anesthesia claims (P < 0.025), often undergoing elective eye surgery (21%) or facial plastic surgery (26%). More than 40% of claims associated with MAC involved death or permanent brain damage, similar to general anesthesia claims. In contrast, the proportion of regional anesthesia claims with death or permanent brain damage was less (P < 0.01). Respiratory depression, after absolute or relative overdose of sedative or opioid drugs, was the most common (21%, n = 25) specific damaging mechanism in MAC claims. Nearly half of these claims were judged as preventable by better monitoring, including capnography, improved vigilance, or audible alarms. On-the-patient operating room fires, from the use of electrocautery, in the presence of supplemental oxygen during facial surgery, resulted in burn injuries in 20 MAC claims (17%).
CONCLUSION: Oversedation leading to respiratory depression was an important mechanism of patient injuries during MAC. Appropriate use of monitoring, vigilance, and early resuscitation could have prevented many of these injuries. Awareness and avoidance of the fire triad (oxidizer, fuel, and ignition source) is essential to prevent on-the-patient fires.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16436839     DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200602000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesthesiology        ISSN: 0003-3022            Impact factor:   7.892


  56 in total

1.  Comparison of electrophysiologic monitors with clinical assessment of level of sedation.

Authors:  Christopher J Chisholm; Joseph Zurica; Dmitry Mironov; Robert R Sciacca; Eugene Ornstein; Eric J Heyer
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 7.616

2.  Deep sedation without intubation for ERCP is appropriate in healthier, non-obese patients.

Authors:  Sheila Ryan Barnett; Tyler Berzin; Sirish Sanaka; Douglas Pleskow; Mandeep Sawhney; Ram Chuttani
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2013-07-23       Impact factor: 3.199

3.  The effect of intraoral suction on oxygen-enriched surgical environments: a mechanism for reducing the risk of surgical fires.

Authors:  Andrea M VanCleave; James E Jones; James D McGlothlin; Mark A Saxen; Brian J Sanders; LaQuia A Vinson
Journal:  Anesth Prog       Date:  2014

4.  Evaluation of the SEDline to improve the safety and efficiency of conscious sedation.

Authors:  Thomas D Caputo; Michael A E Ramsay; Jeffrey A Rossmann; M Miles Beach; Garth R Griffiths; Benjamin Meyrat; James B Barnes; David G Kerns; Brad Crump; Barnett Bookatz; Paul Ezzo
Journal:  Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)       Date:  2011-07

5.  Analysis of expert consultation referrals to the Korean Society of Anesthesiologists (KSA): a comparison of procedural sedation and general anesthesia.

Authors:  Sung-Jin Hong; Yoo-Jin Kang; Young-Hun Jeon; Ji-Seon Son; Jang-Ho Song; Chan-Seon Yoo; Duk-Kyung Kim
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 2.078

6.  Office-based surgical and medical procedures: educational gaps.

Authors:  Richard D Urman; Nathan Punwani; Fred E Shapiro
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2012

7.  Effects of a simulation-based sedation training course on non-anesthesiologists' attitudes toward sedation and analgesia.

Authors:  Nobuyasu Komasawa; Shunsuke Fujiwara; Kazuaki Atagi; Ryusuke Ueki; Masanori Haba; Hironobu Ueshima; Yoshiroh Kaminoh; Toshiaki Minami
Journal:  J Anesth       Date:  2014-01-18       Impact factor: 2.078

Review 8.  Techniques to Optimize Multimodal Analgesia in Ambulatory Surgery.

Authors:  Amit Prabhakar; John N Cefalu; Josef S Rowe; Alan D Kaye; Richard D Urman
Journal:  Curr Pain Headache Rep       Date:  2017-05

9.  Operating room fires in periocular surgery.

Authors:  Michael A Connor; Anne M Menke; Ivan Vrcek; John W Shore
Journal:  Int Ophthalmol       Date:  2017-05-20       Impact factor: 2.031

10.  Recovery from prolonged deep rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade: A randomized comparison of sugammadex reversal with spontaneous recovery.

Authors:  N Rahe-Meyer; C Berger; M Wittmann; C Solomon; E A M Abels; H Rietbergen; D A Reuter
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 1.041

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.