Abstract

There is aworldwide consensus among experts that guidelines and algorithms on airway management contribute to improved patient safety in anesthesia. The present study aimed to determine the current practice of airway management of German anesthesiologists and assess the safety gap, defined as the difference between observed and recommended practice, amongst these practitioners. To determine the effect of implementing the guidelines on airway management practice in Germany amongst anesthesiologists and identify potential safety gaps. Asurvey was conducted in September 2019 by contacting all registered members of the German Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (DGAI) via email. The participants were asked about their personal and institutional background, adherence to recommendations of the current German S1 guidelines and availability of airway devices. A total of 1862 DGAI members completed the questionnaire (response rate 17%). The main outcome was that anesthesiologists mostly adhered to the guidelines, yet certain recommendations, particularly pertaining to specifics of preoxygenation and training, showed asafety gap. More than 90% of participants had avideo laryngoscope and half had performed more than 25 awake intubations using aflexible endoscope; however, only 81% had avideo laryngoscope with ahyperangulated blade. An estimated 16% of all intubations were performed with avideo laryngoscope, and 1 in 4 participants had performed awake intubation with it. Nearly all participants had cared for patients with suspected difficult airways. Half of the participants had already faced a"cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate" (CICO) situation and one in five had to perform an emergency front of neck access (eFONA) at least once. In this case, almost two thirds used puncture-based techniques and one third scalpel-based techniques. Current practice of airway management showed overall adherence to the current German guidelines on airway management, yet certain areas need to be improved.

Highlights

  • There is a worldwide consensus among experts that guidelines and algorithms on airway management contribute to improved patient safety in anesthesia

  • A total of 10,982 DGAI members received the e-mail with the link to the survey platform, 4627 (42.1%) opened the e-mail and 2160 (19.7%) edited the survey within 3 months

  • Equipment for flexible endoscopic intubation is available for 94.1% of the survey participants, 81% of the respondents are equipped with hyperangulated blades and 83.4% of the survey participants stated that second generation laryngeal masks (SGAD) are available at their workstation

Read more

Summary

Introduction

There is a worldwide consensus among experts that guidelines and algorithms on airway management contribute to improved patient safety in anesthesia. The present study aimed to determine the current practice of airway management of German anesthesiologists and assess the safety gap, defined as the difference between observed and recommended practice, amongst these practitioners. Half of the participants had already faced a “cannot intubate, cannot oxygenate” (CICO) situation and one in five had to perform an emergency front of neck access (eFONA) at least once In this case, almost two thirds used puncture-based techniques and one third scalpel-based techniques. Novel airway devices have been developed and techniques established, yet differences in equipment and concepts for airway management persist amongst German anesthesiologists Audit projects such as NAP4 [8] or the Danish Anaesthesia Database [2] that examined nationwide airway management-related data and complications do not yet exist in Germany. The present survey aimed to delineate the current airway management practice in Germany

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call