Technology assessment of anaesthesia monitors: problems and future directions

Abstract

Specific factors have limited the interpretation of studies regarding the efficacy, effectiveness and efficiency of technology in anaesthesia. Some of these problems are reviewed, including the lack of specific outcomes necessitating the use of intermediate measures (e.g., hypoxaemia, myocardial ischaemia), which are not necessarily related to ultimate patient outcomes. This emphasizes the need for anaesthesia investigators to define fundamental issues specifically and design studies accordingly. With respect to anaesthesia monitors, the "lead time" or early warning provided by a monitor relative to that required to alter therapy effectively needs to be defined better and compared with the "lead time" without the monitor. After defining the benefit of a monitor, investigators should analyze the cost relative to alternatives (cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness). A hierarchical model to guide technology assessment is presented that addresses in order, the scientific basis of the technology, and the influence on the patient followed by societal issues. Anaesthetists have relied on traditional methods of technology assessment adopted from other disciplines. These methodologies do not address specific issues related to anaesthesia practice (such as "lead time"). In defining problems specific to the specialty of anaesthesia, new outcome measures that focus on the human factors related to decision-making in the operating room need to be developed. Future evaluations of anaesthesia technology require innovative approaches that address specific anaesthesia-related problems. One such approach is the use of simulation-based studies of response patterns to critical incidents.