Literature DB >> 29352365

[Anesthesia problem cards-indispensable yet problematic : Nationwide survey on experiences from clinical practice].

M Schieren1, A Böhmer2, W Golbeck2, J Defosse2, F Wappler2, H E Marcus2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anesthetic procedures may lead to severe and potentially life-threatening complications (e. g. difficult airway, allergic reactions, malignant hyperthermia). Most complications can be avoided in future anesthetic procedures with adequate preparation (e. g. awake intubation, trigger-free anesthesia). In Germany, anesthesia problem cards were introduced two decades ago to identify patients at risk and to increase patient safety by creating a standardized documentation system for anesthesia-related complications. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the utility and problems of anesthesia problem cards in clinical practice.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: All registered members of the German Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) and the Professional Association of German Anesthesiologists (BDA) (n = 19,042) were invited to participate in an online survey on patient safety. A subsection of the survey focused specifically on anesthesia problem cards and their utility in clinical practice (e. g. field of application, issuing procedures, benefits and problems).
RESULTS: The survey subsection on anesthesia problem cards was completed by 1783 participants. Most agreed that anesthesia problem cards are a useful tool to increase patient safety (n = 1502; 84.2%) and that they are routinely issued after the occurrence of anesthesia-related complications (n = 1664, 93.4%). One of the major problems noted was that patients frequently forget to bring their anesthesia problem cards when presenting for the preanesthetic assessment. This was observed by 1457 participants (81.7%). Furthermore, the information provided on anesthesia problem cards may be inadequately phrased (n = 874; 49.0%) or illegible (n = 833; 46.7%). In addition, the space for individual comments or problem solutions is insufficient (n = 811; 45.5%). Replacements for lost anesthesia problem cards with identical informational content can be issued in only 41.9% (n = 747) of the participants' departments.
CONCLUSION: Anesthesia problem cards are considered a useful tool to increase patient safety and are frequently issued in clinical practice; however, in the document's current form its full potential for risk minimization cannot be exploited. Structural changes are required to increase documentation quality and reproducibility. Concerning its informational content, the spectrum of included complications and their individual solutions need to be expanded to meet the requirements of modern anesthetic practice.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anaesthesia problem card; Difficult airway; Patient safety; Risk management; Survey

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29352365     DOI: 10.1007/s00101-018-0407-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anaesthesist        ISSN: 0003-2417            Impact factor:   1.041


  9 in total

1.  [Serious intraoperative problems--a five-year review of 83,844 anesthetics].

Authors:  Sigurd Fasting; Sven E Gisvold
Journal:  Can J Anaesth       Date:  2002 Jun-Jul       Impact factor: 5.063

Review 2.  [S1 guidelines on airway management].

Authors:  T Piepho; E Cavus; R Noppens; C Byhahn; V Dörges; B Zwissler; A Timmermann
Journal:  Anaesthesist       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 1.041

Review 3.  The difficult airway in adult critical care.

Authors:  Gavin G Lavery; Brian V McCloskey
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 7.598

4.  Effect of simulation training on compliance with difficult airway management algorithms, technical ability, and skills retention for emergency cricothyrotomy.

Authors:  Vincent Hubert; Antoine Duwat; Romain Deransy; Yazine Mahjoub; Hervé Dupont
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 7.892

5.  Use of patients' mobile phones to store and share personal health information: results of a questionnaire survey.

Authors:  Satoru Tawara; Yasuhiro Yonemochi; Takayuki Kosaka; Yanosuke Kouzaki; Tomohiro Takita; Toshihisa Tsuruta
Journal:  Intern Med       Date:  2013-04-01       Impact factor: 1.271

6.  Incidence, predictors, and outcome of difficult mask ventilation combined with difficult laryngoscopy: a report from the multicenter perioperative outcomes group.

Authors:  Sachin Kheterpal; David Healy; Michael F Aziz; Amy M Shanks; Robert E Freundlich; Fiona Linton; Lizabeth D Martin; Jonathan Linton; Jerry L Epps; Ana Fernandez-Bustamante; Leslie C Jameson; Tyler Tremper; Kevin K Tremper
Journal:  Anesthesiology       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 7.892

Review 7.  Dantrolene--a review of its pharmacology, therapeutic use and new developments.

Authors:  T Krause; M U Gerbershagen; M Fiege; R Weisshorn; F Wappler
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 6.955

Review 8.  Advanced airway management simulation training in medical education: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Cassie C Kennedy; Eric K Cannon; David O Warner; David A Cook
Journal:  Crit Care Med       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 7.598

Review 9.  Videolaryngoscopy versus direct laryngoscopy for adult patients requiring tracheal intubation.

Authors:  Sharon R Lewis; Andrew R Butler; Joshua Parker; Tim M Cook; Andrew F Smith
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-11-15
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.