Search

A new safety-orientated drug infusion label was studied and was compared with conventional methods by prospectively collecting incident reports from November 1998 to November 2003. Anaesthetists were asked to return an incident form for every anaesthetic (87% response rate), the vast majority indicating that no error had occurred. One error was reported with the use of the new label. However, this was due to an incorrect patient weight being recorded in the notes, and the dose was correct for the information available. Therefore, this data point was not included in the analysis. Seven errors were reported in the calculation of dosage using conventional infusion labels during 18 491 anaesthetics compared with no calculation errors in 10 655 anaesthetics with the new label (p = 0.045, Chi-squared test). Despite the difficulties of demonstrating significant benefit from safety initiatives in medicine, these data suggest that targeted system redesign can be effective inreducing error.

Safety practices in health care have not kept pace with the increasing complexity of medical technology. Although anaesthesia is generally considered to be a leader in the improvement of patient safety, more powerful safety strategies must be found and employed. From an analysis of system characteristics, the nuclear power industry is proposed as an alternative analogy for safety in anaesthesia, and a novel diagrammatic approach is developed for the conceptualisation of safety goals. The nuclear power industry has spent vastly more time and money than has health care on the development of safety, and has progressed through significant safety milestones approximately three times more quickly than has anaesthesia. The greatest scope for the improvement of safety in anaesthesia lies in the appropriate re-design of medical systems and the lowering of the threshold for the reporting of incidents to include accident precursors, thus allowing the identification of dangerous systems before accidents occur.

We report a patient with the unusual language disturbance of transient fixation on a non-native language after otherwise uneventful general anaesthesia. The patient was unable to speak his native language for a period of 5-10 min, despite a desire to do so. He fully and spontaneously recovered from the episode. The phenomenon raises a number of interesting questions about the nature of human language, anaesthesia and consciousness. We discuss our patient in the context of some of these questions and present a review of three similar patients reported in the anaesthetic literature.

We developed evidence-based recommendations for the minimisation of errors in intravenous drug administration in anaesthesia from a systematic review of the literature that identified 98 relevant references (14 with experimental designs or incident reports and 19 with reports of cases or case series). We validated the recommendations using reports of drug errors collected in a previous study. One general and five specific strong recommendations were generated: systematic countermeasures should be used to decrease the number of drug administration errors in anaesthesia; the label on any drug ampoule or syringe should be read carefully before a drug is drawn up or injected; the legibility and contents of labels on ampoules and syringes should be optimised according to agreed standards; syringes should (almost) always be labelled; formal organisation of drug drawers and workspaces should be used; labels should be checked with a second person or a device before a drug is drawn up or administered.

Fifteen anaesthetists were observed while providing anaesthesia for 15 pairs of adult cardiac surgical operations, using conventional methods for one of each pair and a new drug administration system designed to reduce error for the other. Aspects of each method were rated by users on 10-cm visual analogue scales (10 being best). The new system was rated more favourably than conventional methods in terms of safety (median [range] = 8.1 [6.8-9.7] vs. 7.1 [2.6-9.3] cm; p = 0.001) and usability (8.5 [5.9-9.4] vs. 7.5 [3.2-9.8] cm; p=0.027). The new system saved preparation time both before anaesthesia (median [range] = 180 [32-480] vs. 360 [120-600] s; p=0.013) and during anaesthesia (10 [2-38] vs. 12 [10-60] s; p=0.009). Prefilled syringes for the new system increased costs by euro 23.00 per anaesthetic (p = 0.041), but this increase is likely to be offset by the potential of the new system to decrease costly iatrogenic harm by preventing drug error.

Ten anaesthetists were observed while providing anaesthesia for two simulated surgical procedures, twice using conventional methods and twice using a prototype of a new drug administration system designed to reduce error. Aspects of each method were rated by users on 10-cm visual analogue scales (10 being best) and comments were invited. Median safety scores were 7.7 cm (range 4.3-8.9) for the new system and 4.6 cm (1.3-8.2) for conventional methods (p = 0.009). The new system was compared favourably with conventional methods in respect of safety (p = 0.005), clinical acceptability (p = 0.008), organisation and layout (p = 0.047), and acceptability for use on patients (p = 0.005). The new system saved time in the preparation of drugs both before anaesthesia (105 vs. 346 s; p < 0.001) and during anaesthesia (20 vs. 104 s; p < 0.001). Comments facilitated development of the system and the evaluation endorsed proceeding to a clinical trial.