Non-operating Room Anesthesia Research Articles

Interventional Procedures Outside of the Operating Room: Results From the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry.

This study examines the impact of procedural locations and types of anesthetics on patient outcomes in non-operating room anesthesia (NORA) locations. The National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry database was examined to compare OR to NORA anesthetic complications and patient demographics. The National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry database was examined for all patient procedures from 2010 to 2013. A total of 12,252,846 cases were analyzed, with 205 practices contributing information, representing 1494 facilities and 7767 physician providers. Cases were separated on the basis of procedure location, OR, or NORA. Subgroup analysis examined outcomes from specific subspecialties. NORA procedures were performed on a higher percentage of patients older than 50 years (61.92% versus 55.56%, P < 0.0001). Monitored anesthesia care (MAC) (20.15%) and sedation (2.05%) were more common in NORA locations. The most common minor complications were postoperative nausea and vomiting (1.06%), inadequate pain control (1.01%), and hemodynamic instability (0.62%). The most common major complications were serious hemodynamic instability (0.10%) and upgrade of care (0.10%). There was a greater incidence of complications in cardiology and radiology locations. Overall mortality was higher in OR versus NORA (0.04% versus 0.02%, P < 0.0001). Subcategory analysis showed increased incidence of death in cardiology and radiology locations (0.05%). NORA procedures have lower morbidity and mortality rates than OR procedures, contrary to some previously published studies. However, the increased complication rates in both the cardiology and radiology locations may need to be the target of future safety investigations. Providers must ensure proper monitoring of patients, and NORA locations need to be held to the same standard of care as the main operating room. Further studies need to identify at-risk patients and procedures that may predispose patients to complications.

Anesthesia and sedation outside of the operating room.

Due to rapid evolution and technological advancements, medical personnel now require special training outside of their safe zones. Anesthesiologists face challenges in practicing in locations beyond the operating room. New locations, inadequate monitoring devices, poor assisting staff, unfamiliarity of procedures, insufficient knowledge of basic standards, and lack of experience compromise the quality of patient care. Therefore, anesthesiologists must recognize possible risk factors during anesthesia in nonoperating rooms and familiarize themselves with standards to improve safe practice. This review article emphasizes the need for standardizing hospitals and facilities requiring nonoperating room anesthesia, and encourages anesthesiologists to take the lead in applying these practice guidelines to improve patient outcomes and reduce adverse events.

Using quality improvement methods to optimize resources and maximize productivity in an anesthesia screening and consultation clinic

The anesthesia preoperative screening and evaluation of a patient prior to surgery is a critical element in the safe and effective delivery of anesthesia care. In this era of increased focus on cost containment, many anesthesia practices are looking for ways to maximize productivity while maintaining the quality of the preoperative evaluation process by harnessing and optimizing all available resources. We sought to develop a Nurse Practitioner-assisted Preoperative Anesthesia Screening process using quality improvement methods with the goal of maintaining the quality of the screening process, while at the same time redirecting anesthesiologists time for the provision of nonoperating room (OR) anesthesia. The Nurse practitioner (NP) time (approximately 10 h per week) directed to this project was gained as a result of an earlier resource utilization improvement project within the Department of Anesthesia. The goal of this improvement project was to increase the proportion of patient anesthesia screens conducted by NPs to 50% within 6 months. After discussion with key stakeholders of the process, a multidisciplinary improvement team identified a set of operational factors (key drivers) believed to be important to the success of the preoperative anesthesia screening process. These included the development of dedicated NP time for daily screening, NP competency and confidence with the screening process, effective mentoring by anesthesiologists, standardization of screening process, and communication with stakeholders of the process, that is, surgeons. These key drivers focused on the development of several interventions such as (i) NP education in the preoperative anesthesia screening for consultation process by a series of didactic lectures conducted by anesthesiologists, and NP's shadowing an anesthesiologist during the screening process, (ii) Anesthesiologist mentoring and assessment of NP screenings using the dual screening process whereby both anesthesiologists and NP conducted the screening process independently and results were compared and discussed, (iii) Examination and re-adjustment of NP schedules to provide time for daily screening while preserving other responsibilities, and (iv) Standardization through the development of guidelines for the preoperative screening process. Measures recorded included the percentage of patient anesthesia screens conducted by NP, the percentage of dual screens with MD and NP agreement regarding the screening decision, and the average times taken for the anesthesiologist and NP screening process. After implementation of these interventions, the percentage of successful NP-assisted anesthesia consultation screenings increased from 0% to 65% over a period of 6 months. The Anesthesiologists' time redirected to non-OR anesthesia averaged at least 8 h a week. The percentage of dual screens with agreement on the screening decision was 96% (goal >95%). The overall average time taken for a NP screen was 8.2 min vs 4.5 min for an anesthesiologist screen. The overall average operating room delays and cancelations for cases on the day of surgery remained the same. By applying quality improvement methods, we identified key drivers for the institution of an NP-assisted preoperative screening process and successfully implemented this process while redirecting anesthesiologists' time for the provision of non-OR anesthesia. This project was instrumental in improving the matching of provider skills with clinical need while maintaining superior outcomes at the lowest possible cost.

Demographics and trends in nonoperating-room anesthesia

Nonoperating-room anesthesia includes sedation or anesthesia for radiological imaging, cardiac catheterization, office-based surgery, and pediatric procedures or investigations, all of which have seen explosive growth over the last decade. This review discusses the factors that are driving this growth and the challenges we face as a profession to accommodate new practice paradigms. Many departments have difficulty providing services for nonoperating-room anesthesia. A shortage of providers, insufficient reimbursement, and lack of institutional support have been identified as barriers limiting delivery of pediatric nonoperating-room sedation services. Practitioners from other specialties appear increasingly eager to provide sedation at an institutional level. The use of propofol by nonanesthesiologists is widespread, and the issue of provider credentialing has yet to be fully resolved. The shift to nonoperating-room locations will continue, driven by cost savings and convenience for patients and providers. Nonoperating-room anesthesia will play a central role in anesthesia practice in the future. Provision of these services requires planning, personnel, and institutional resources. This should be a high priority for anesthesiology departments to ensure delivery of the highest quality of patient care in a cost-effective and organized manner.

Closed claims review of anesthesia for procedures outside the operating room

The demand for anesthesia services is increasing due to more complex procedures being performed outside the operating room. We reviewed the literature and closed malpractice claims in the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Closed Claims database to assess liability and injury associated with anesthesia for procedures outside the operating room (nonoperating-room anesthesia, n = 24) compared with intra-operative surgical anesthesia (operating room, n = 1927) claims. A higher proportion of patients in nonoperating-room anesthesia claims underwent monitored anesthesia care (58 vs. 6%, P < 0.001) and were at the extremes of age (50 vs. 19%, P = 0.003) than in operating room claims. Half of the nonoperating-room anesthesia claims occurred in the gastrointestinal suite. Inadequate oxygenation/ventilation was the most common specific damaging event in nonoperating-room anesthesia claims (33 vs. 2% in operating room claims, P < 0.001). The proportion of death was increased in nonoperating-room anesthesia claims (54 vs. 24%, P = 0.003). Nonoperating-room anesthesia claims were more often judged as having substandard care (P = 0.003) and being preventable by better monitoring (P = 0.007). Nonoperating-room anesthesia claims had a higher severity of injury and more substandard care than operating room claims. Inadequate oxygenation/ventilation was the most common mechanism of injury. Maintenance of minimum monitoring standards and airway management training is required for staff involved in patient sedation.

Equipment and environmental issues for nonoperating room anesthesia

The demand for anesthesia care outside the operating room continues to grow, driven by trends in advanced diagnostic techniques and the financial advantages of providing care out of the hospital setting. This review examines recent literature identifying new equipment and environmental issues that impact on nonoperating-room anesthesia care. This review addresses the safety implications of the new high-field-strength (3 Tesla) magnetic resonance imaging scanners and also the differences in anesthesia delivery system design that influence the duration of function when only gas cylinders are available. Practitioners who render anesthesia care outside of the operating room need to be cognizant of changing equipment design, which raises new challenges for rendering safe care.

Pediatric anesthesia in the nonoperating room setting

The paper will review the few studies that have been published recently on nonoperating room pediatric anesthesia/sedation. These studies target gaps in our understanding of critical factors associated with the provision of nonoperating room anesthesia safety and reliability in children. More objective data regarding the safety and reliability of this practice have become available. Video can accurately capture a child's state and allow comparison of different sedation techniques more objectively than is possible with available literature. The use of standard simulated events allows rescue performance in actual care systems to be tested for their ability to manage a rare, but critical respiratory depression episode. Preliminary findings from a large multicenter study from the Pediatric Procedural Sedation Research Consortium suggests critical adverse events are rare (one cardiac arrest in over 30,000 sedation encounters), but that potentially critical events occur commonly (one in 400 procedures was associated with stridor, laryngospasm, wheezing or apnea). Research into the critical factors that impact safety and reliability in the performance of nonoperating room anesthesia for children is providing objective observational techniques along with large outcomes databases that should enable targeted improvements in the safety and reliability of this growing practice.

Nonoperating room anesthesia for children

With the continuous development of technological advances for diagnosis and treatment comes the increased need for anesthesia outside of the operating room. Children, because of their inability to cooperate with lengthy imaging procedures or painful treatments, form the largest group needing non operating room anesthesia (NORA). As the distinction between deep sedation and general anesthesia becomes less clear, it has become increasingly common for institutions to dedicate resources for pediatric NORA (as opposed to sedation services) to improve predictability, comfort, and safety. Anesthesia away from the operating room must meet all standards mandated for general anesthesia in the operating suite. In addition, NORA teams must meet non anesthesia specialty guidelines and requirements of the Joint Commission for the Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. The complexities and hazards of distinct environments must be met and technical support provided. Communication, backup, and emergency systems must be integrated, often at significant geographical distances from central anesthesia services. Anesthesia personnel are often required to interact in multiple roles that may be unfamiliar. NORA is a specific microsystem environment that must integrate operating room systems with those of other departments and specialties. Often the children that require these procedures have chronic illnesses and return at frequent intervals with complex medical, psychological, and behavioral issues. Special knowledge, training, and support infrastructure are required to provide optimal care for these expanding services.