Abstract

BackgroundAwareness with recall under general anesthesia remains a rare but important issue that warrants further study.MethodsWe present a series of seven cases of awareness that were identified from provider-reported adverse event data from the electronic anesthesia records of 647,000 general anesthetics.ResultsThe low number of identified cases suggests an under-reporting bias. Themes that emerge from this small series can serve as important reminders to anesthesia providers to ensure delivery of an adequate anesthetic for each patient. Commonalities between a majority of our identified anesthetic awareness cases include: obesity, use of total intravenous anesthesia, use of neuromuscular blockade, and either a lack of processed electroencephalogram (EEG) monitoring or documented high depth of consciousness index values. An interesting phenomenon was observed in one case, where adequately-dosed anesthesia was delivered without technical issue, processed EEG monitoring was employed, and the index value suggested an adequate depth of consciousness throughout the case.ConclusionsProvider-reported adverse event data in the immediate post-operative period are likely insensitive for detecting cases of intraoperative awareness. Though causation cannot firmly be established from our data, themes identified in this series of cases of awareness with recall under general anesthesia provide important reminders for anesthesia providers to maintain vigilance in monitoring depth and dose of anesthesia, particularly with total intravenous anesthesia.

Highlights

  • Awareness with recall under general anesthesia remains a rare but important issue that warrants further study

  • Cases of awareness with recall (AWR) were collected from the Electronic Anesthesia Record (EAR) system of the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center

  • The systemwide EAR was queried for all available electronic anesthesia records over the period 9/13/2010 to 1/12/2019

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Awareness with recall under general anesthesia remains a rare but important issue that warrants further study. Several randomized controlled trials with AWR as the primary endpoint have used structured interviews to detect awareness events and expert panel review to adjudicate possible cases of AWR [1,2,3,4,5,6]. Averaging across the data from these trials gives an incidence of 0.25% for definite AWR and an additional 0.32% of patients having possible AWR. This is corroborated by an incidence of 0.44% in a recent meta-analysis that included randomized trials focused on either anesthetic regimens or anesthetic depth monitors (but not necessarily focused on AWR detection) [7]

Methods
Results
Discussion
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