Search

Continuous improvement of quality and safety is a professional obligation of anesthesiologists and an ongoing activity of all academic departments and private practices. Quality improvement is an infinite process that is never fully complete but that instead evolves over time in response to emerging threats to patient safety from new medications, new surgical procedures, and increased recognition of systematic threats. This review discusses current definitions and thinking in anesthesia quality improvement, outlines recommended efforts at the local department level, and makes suggestions for the projects and activities most likely to benefit the anesthesia patients and clinicians of the future., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Anesthesiologists. All Rights Reserved.)

Purpose of Review: The electronic health record (EHR) is an invaluable tool that may be used to improve patient safety. With a variety of different features, such as clinical decision support and computerized physician order entry, it has enabled improvement of patient care throughout medicine. EHR allows for built-in reminders for such items as antibiotic dosing and venous thromboembolism prophylaxis., Recent Findings: In anesthesiology, EHR often improves patient safety by eliminating the need for reliance on manual documentation, by facilitating information transfer and incorporating predictive models for such items as postoperative nausea and vomiting. The use of EHR has been shown to improve patient safety in specific metrics such as using checklists or information transfer amongst clinicians; however, limited data supports that it reduces morbidity and mortality., Summary: There are numerous potential pitfalls associated with EHR use to improve patient safety, as well as great potential for future improvement., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: Surgical site infections (SSI) are one of the most costly complications and hospital organizations are promoting multidisciplinary approaches to address this harm. Anesthesiologists are increasingly recognized as key players influencing surgical outcomes and patient safety, and play a key role in preventing SSIs., Recent Findings: Recent guidelines and strategies to prevent SSI are focused on the areas which anesthesiologists can impact including antimicrobial prophylaxis, proper hand hygiene, decontamination of environmental surfaces and operating room equipment coming in direct contact with patients., Summary: Timely interventions, including appropriate antibiotics' administration, practicing sterile and aseptic techniques when performing intraoperative procedures and handling medications are impactful steps in the process of improving rates of SSIs. Multidisciplinary participation in local and regional collaborative initiatives to improve adherence to best practices as well as integrated education of all the stakeholders are some of the principles of patient-centered care described in our review., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: Patient safety in anesthesiology has advanced significantly over the past several decades. The current process of improving care is often based on studying adverse events (AEs) and near misses. However, there is a wealth of information not captured by focusing solely on these events, potentially resulting in missed opportunities for care improvements., Recent Findings: We review terms such as AEs and nonroutine events (NREs), and introduce the concept of unanticipated events (UEs), defined as events that deviate from intended care that may/may not have been caused by error, may/may not be preventable, and may/may not have caused injury to a patient. UEs incorporate AEs in addition to many other anesthetic events not routinely tracked, allowing for trend analysis over time and the identification of additional opportunities for quality improvement. We review both automated and self-reporting tools that currently exist to capture this often-neglected wealth of data. Finally, we discuss the responsibility of quality/safety leaders for data monitoring., Summary: Consistent reporting and monitoring for trends related to UEs could allow departments to identify risks and mitigate harm before it occurs. We review various proposed methods to expand data collection, and recommend anesthesia practices pursue UE tracking through department-specific reporting interfaces., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: This review addresses the dental sedation permit requirements for physician anesthesiologists in the United States and the European Union (EU). The regulatory landscape for office-based anesthesia, including dental settings, is often described as the 'Wild West' of patient safety, making it crucial to outline the similarities and differences in dental anesthesia regulations and offer practical guidelines for regulators., Recent Findings: There is virtually no literature that addresses the issue of dental sedation permits for physicians. By summarizing the variation in language and terminology from state to state, this review highlights the inconsistencies and gaps in dental regulations. The review also highlights the limited specific guidance on the permit process for physicians administering dental anesthesia., Summary: By comparing dental anesthesia regulations and guidelines across all U.S. states and the EU, the review aims to offer practical guidelines for regulators to institute an oversight process that is fair to physician anesthesiologists and does not impede their ability to practice in the dental office setting. This framework for credentialing and permitting physicians in dental office-based anesthesia settings is informed by existing safety recommendations and best practices., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: To explore the collaboration between human factors (HFs) experts and clinicians in order to improve perioperative patient safety., Recent Findings: Recent recommendations to integrate human factors into anesthesia in the United Kingdom emphasizes the value of applying disciplines outside of medicine to optimize the patient experience., Summary: Human factors engineering is underutilized worldwide. Patient safety would benefit from collaboration with HF experts to design resilient systems. Healthcare organizations must consider HF to develop and implement user-centered solutions to improve safety for patients and professionals., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: This review explores the timely and relevant applications of machine learning in ambulatory anesthesia, focusing on its potential to optimize operational efficiency, personalize risk assessment, and enhance patient care., Recent Findings: Machine learning models have demonstrated the ability to accurately forecast case durations, Post-Anesthesia Care Unit (PACU) lengths of stay, and risk of hospital transfers based on preoperative patient and procedural factors. These models can inform case scheduling, resource allocation, and preoperative evaluation. Additionally, machine learning can standardize assessments, predict outcomes, improve handoff communication, and enrich patient education., Summary: Machine learning has the potential to revolutionize ambulatory anesthesia practice by optimizing efficiency, personalizing care, and improving quality and safety. However, limitations such as algorithmic opacity, data biases, reproducibility issues, and adoption barriers must be addressed through transparent, participatory design principles and ongoing validation to ensure responsible innovation and incremental adoption., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Purpose of Review: We briefly review the concept of psychological safety and discuss the actions that can create it in the anesthesiologist's work environment., Recent Findings: The interest in psychological safety has grown in popularity since the publication of Amy Edmondson's book The Fearless Organization in 2018. While the concept and its benefits are described in the healthcare literature, the specific actions necessary to create it are often not., Summary: To ensure patient safety, we want members of the teams we lead to be comfortable sharing emerging problems that they see before we become aware of them. As educators, we want trainees to approach us when they do not understand something and openly participate and contribute without the fear of how others will perceive them. These scenarios require an environment of psychological safety - the ability to ask for help, admit mistakes, and be respectfully forthright with unpopular beliefs without the fear of being ostracized or ignored. Methods for creating an environment of psychological safety will be discussed., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Women continue to be underrepresented in academic anesthesiology. This study assessed guidelines in anesthesia journals over the past 5 years, evaluating differences in woman-led versus man-led guidelines in terms of author gender, quality, and changes over time. We hypothesized that anesthesia guidelines would be predominately man-led, and that there would be differences in quality between woman-led versus man-led guidelines., Methods: All clinical practice guidelines published in the top 10 anesthesia journals were identified as per Clarivate Analytics Impact Factor between 2016 and 2020. Fifty-one guidelines were included for author, gender, and quality analysis using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research & Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. Each guideline was assessed across 6 domains and 23 items and given an overall score, overall quality score, and overall rating/recommendation. Stratified and trend analyses were performed for woman-led versus man-led guidelines., Results: Fifty out of 51 guidelines were included: 1 was excluded due to unidentifiable first-author gender. In total, 255 of 1052 (24%) authors were women, and woman-led guidelines (woman-first author) represented 12 of 50 (24%) overall guidelines. Eighteen percent (9 of 50) of guidelines had all-male authors, and a majority (26 of 50, 52%) had less than one-third of female authors. The overall number and percentage of woman-led guidelines did not change over time. There was a significantly higher percentage of female authors in woman-led versus man-led guidelines, median 39% vs 20% ( P = .012), as well as a significantly higher number of female coauthors in guidelines that were woman-led median 3.5 vs 1.0, P = .049. For quality, there was no significant difference in the overall rating or objective quality of woman- versus man-led guidelines. However, there was a significant increase in the overall rating of all the guidelines over time ( P = .010), driven by the increase in overall rating among man-led guidelines, P = .002. The overall score of guidelines did not increase over time; however, they increased in man-led but not woman-led guidelines. There was no significant correlation between the percentage of female authors per guideline and either overall score or overall rating., Conclusions: There is a substantial disparity in the number of women leading and contributing to guidelines which has not improved over time. Woman-led guidelines included more women and a higher percentage of women. There was no difference in quality of guidelines by first-author gender or percentage of female authors. Further systematic and quota-driven sponsorship is needed to promote gender equity, diversity, and inclusion in anesthesia guidelines., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

During the past 70 years, patient safety science has evolved through four organizational frameworks known as Safety-0, Safety -1, Safety-2, and Safety-3. Their evolution reflects the realization over time that blaming people, chasing errors, fixing one-offs, and regulation would not create the desired patient safety. In Safety-0, the oldest framework, harm events arise from clinician failure; event prevention relies on better staffing, education, and basic standards. In Safety-1, used by hospitals, harm events arise from individual and/or system failures. Safety is improved through analytics, workplace culture, high reliability principles, technology, and quality improvement. Safety-2 emphasizes clinicians' adaptability to prevent harm events in an everchanging environment, using resilience engineering principles. Safety-3, used by aviation, adds system design and control elements to Safety-1 and Safety-2, deploying human factors, design-thinking, and operational control or feedback to prevent and respond to harm events. Safety-3 represents a potential way for anesthesia and perioperative care to become safer., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Anesthesiologists. All Rights Reserved.)

Prompt recognition and management of critical events is pivotal for the provision of safe anesthetic care. This requires a well-functioning team that focuses on effective communication, timely decision-making, and escalation of potential complications. We believe that variation in bedside care leads to "near-misses," adverse outcomes, and serious safety events (SSEs). The principles of an escalation culture have been used successfully in other highly reliable industries such as aviation, military, and manufacturing. We discuss here the introduction of a unique and compelling thought-process for developing an intraoperative escalation protocol that is specifically tailored for our institution. Inspired by a critical intraoperative event, this departmental protocol was developed based on an analysis of multispecialty literature and expert opinion to decrease the incidence of SSEs. It includes a stepwise approach and incorporates patient-specific information to guide team members who encounter dynamic clinical situations. The implementation of the protocol has facilitated continuous quality improvement through iterative education, improving communication, and enhancing decision-making. Concurrently, we have plans to incorporate technology and electronic decision support tools to enhance real-time communication, monitor performance, and foster a culture of safety., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

This consensus statement is a comprehensive update of the 2010 Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA) Consensus Statement on perioperative blood glucose management in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) undergoing ambulatory surgery. Since the original consensus guidelines in 2010, several novel therapeutic interventions have been introduced to treat DM, including new hypoglycemic agents and increasing prevalence of insulin pumps and continuous glucose monitors. The updated recommendations were developed by an expert task force under the provision of SAMBA and are based on a comprehensive review of the literature from 1980 to 2022. The task force included SAMBA members with expertise on this topic and those contributing to the primary literature regarding the management of DM in the perioperative period. The recommendations encompass preoperative evaluation of patients with DM presenting for ambulatory surgery, management of preoperative oral hypoglycemic agents and home insulins, intraoperative testing and treatment modalities, and blood glucose management in the postanesthesia care unit and transition to home after surgery. High-quality evidence pertaining to perioperative blood glucose management in patients with DM undergoing ambulatory surgery remains sparse. Recommendations are therefore based on recent guidelines and available literature, including general glucose management in patients with DM, data from inpatient surgical populations, drug pharmacology, and emerging treatment data. Areas in need of further research are also identified. Importantly, the benefits and risks of interventions and clinical practice information were considered to ensure that the recommendations maintain patient safety and are clinically valid and useful in the ambulatory setting. What Other Guidelines Are Available on This Topic? Since the publication of the SAMBA Consensus Statement for perioperative blood glucose management in the ambulatory setting in 2010, several recent guidelines have been issued by the American Diabetes Association (ADA), the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE), the Endocrine Society, the Centre for Perioperative Care (CPOC), and the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (AAGBI) on DM care in hospitalized patients; however, none are specific to ambulatory surgery. How Does This Guideline Differ From the Previous Guidelines? Previously posed clinical questions that were outdated were revised to reflect current clinical practice. Additional questions were developed relating to the perioperative management of patients with DM to include the newer therapeutic interventions., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2024 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Competing Interests: The author declares no conflict of interest.

Background: The learning-curve cumulative sum method (LC-CUSUM) and its risk-adjusted form (RA-LC-CUSUM) have been proposed as performance-monitoring methods to assess competency during the learning phase of procedural skills. However, scarce data exist about the method's accuracy. This study aimed to compare the accuracy of LC-CUSUM forms using historical data consisting of sequences of successes and failures in brachial plexus blocks (BPBs) performed by anesthesia residents., Methods: Using historical data from 1713 BPB performed by 32 anesthesia residents, individual learning curves were constructed using the LC-CUSUM and RA-LC-CUSUM methods. A multilevel logistic regression model predicted the procedure-specific risk of failure incorporated in the RA-LC-CUSUM calculations. Competency was defined as a maximum 15% cumulative failure rate and was used as the reference for determining the accuracy of both methods., Results: According to the LC-CUSUM method, 22 residents (84.61%) attained competency after a median of 18.5 blocks (interquartile range [IQR], 14-23), while the RA-LC-CUSUM assigned competency to 20 residents (76.92%) after a median of 17.5 blocks (IQR, 14-25, P = .001). The median failure rate at reaching competency was 6.5% (4%-9.75%) under the LC-CUSUM and 6.5% (4%-9%) for the RA-LC-CUSUM method ( P = .37). The sensitivity of the LC-CUSUM (85%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 71%-98%) was similar to the RA-LC-CUSUM method (77%; 95% CI, 61%-93%; P = .15). Identical specificity values were found for both methods (67%; 95% CI, 29%-100%, P = 1)., Conclusions: The LC-CUSUM and RA-LC-CUSUM methods were associated with substantial false-positive and false-negative rates. Also, small lower limits for the 95% CIs around the accuracy measures were observed, indicating that the methods may be inaccurate for high-stakes decisions about resident competency at BPBs., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Purpose of Review: This review explores the intricacies of ethical anesthesia, exploring the necessity for precision anesthesia and its impact on patient-reported outcomes. The primary objective is to advocate for a defined aim, promoting the implementation of rules and feedback systems. The ultimate goal is to enhance precision anesthesia care, ensuring patient safety through the implementation of a teamwork and the integration of feedback mechanisms., Recent Findings: Recent strategies in the field of anesthesia have evolved from intraoperative monitorization to a wider perioperative patient-centered precision care. Nonetheless, implementing this approach encounters significant obstacles. The article explores the evidence supporting the need for a defined aim and applicable rules for precision anesthesia's effectiveness. The implementation of the safety culture is underlined. The review delves into the teamwork description with structured feedback systems., Summary: Anesthesia is a multifaceted discipline that involves various stakeholders. The primary focus is delivering personalized precision care. This review underscores the importance of establishing clear aims, defined rules, and fostering effective and well tolerated teamwork with accurate feedback for improving patient-reported outcomes. The Safe Brain Initiative approach, emphasizing algorithmic monitoring and systematic follow-up, is crucial in implementing a fundamental and standardized reporting approach within patient-centered anesthesia care practice., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: To discuss considerations surrounding the use of point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) in pediatric anesthesiology., Recent Findings: POCUS is an indispensable tool in various medical specialties, including pediatric anesthesiology. Credentialing for POCUS should be considered to ensure that practitioners are able to acquire images, interpret them correctly, and use ultrasound to guide procedures safely and effectively. In the absence of formal guidelines for anesthesiology, current practice and oversight varies by institution. In this review, we will explore the significance of POCUS in pediatric anesthesiology, discuss credentialing, and compare the specific requirements and challenges currently associated with using POCUS in pediatric anesthesia., Summary: Point-of-care ultrasound is being utilized by the pediatric anesthesiologist and has the potential to improve patient assessment, procedure guidance, and decision-making. Guidelines increase standardization and quality assurance procedures help maintain high-quality data. Credentialing standards for POCUS in pediatric anesthesiology are essential to ensure that practitioners have the necessary skills and knowledge to use this technology effectively and safely. Currently, there are no national pediatric POCUS guidelines to base credentialing processes on for pediatric anesthesia practices. Further work directed at establishing pediatric-specific curriculum goals and competency standards are needed to train current and future pediatric anesthesia providers and increase overall acceptance of POCUS use., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The Anesthesiology Performance Improvement and Reporting Exchange (ASPIRE) Collaborative Quality Initiative (CQI) was launched as a partnership among hospitals to measure quality, review evidence-based practices, and improve anesthesia-related outcomes. Cost savings and improved patient outcomes have been associated with surgical CQI participation, but the impact of an anesthesia CQI on health care cost has not been thoroughly assessed. In this study, we evaluated whether participation in an anesthesia CQI led to health care savings. We hypothesized that ASPIRE participation is associated with reduced total episode payments for payers and major, high-volume procedures included in the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) registry., Methods: In this retrospective observational study, we compared MVC episode payment data from Group 1 ASPIRE hospitals, the first cluster of 8 Michigan hospitals to join ASPIRE in January 2015, to non-ASPIRE matched control hospitals. MVC computes price-standardized, risk-adjusted payments for patients insured by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Preferred Provider Organization, Blue Care Network Health Maintenance Organization, and Medicare Fee-for-Service plans. Episodes from 2014 comprised the pre-ASPIRE time period, and episodes from June 2016 to July 2017 constituted the post-ASPIRE time period. We performed a difference-in-differences analysis to evaluate whether ASPIRE implementation was associated with greater reduction in total episode payments compared to the change in the control hospitals during the same time periods., Results: We found a statistically significant reduction in total episode (-$719; 95% CI [-$1340 to -$97]; P = .023) payments at the 8 ASPIRE hospitals (N = 17,852 cases) compared to the change observed in 8 matched non-ASPIRE hospitals (N = 12,987 cases) for major, high-volume surgeries, including colectomy, colorectal cancer resection, gastrectomy, esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, hysterectomy, joint replacement (knee and hip), and hip fracture repair. In secondary analyses, 30-day postdischarge (-$354; 95% CI [-$582 to -$126]; P = .002) payments were also significantly reduced in ASPIRE hospitals compared to non-ASPIRE controls. Subgroup analyses revealed a significant reduction in total episode payments for joint replacements (-$860; 95% CI [-$1222 to -$499]; P < .001) at ASPIRE-participating hospitals. Sensitivity analyses including patient-level covariates also showed consistent results., Conclusions: Participation in an anesthesiology CQI, ASPIRE, is associated with lower total episode payments for selected major, high-volume procedures. This analysis supports that participation in an anesthesia CQI can lead to reduced health care payments., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2023 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Ellison C. Pierce, Jr., M.D., and a small number of specialty leaders and scientists formed a remarkable, diverse team in the mid-1980s to address a dual crisis: a safety crisis for anesthetized patients and a medical malpractice insurance crisis for anesthesiologists. This cohesive team's efforts led to the formation of the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation, the American Society of Anesthesiologists's Committees on Standards of Care and on Patient Safety and Risk Management, and the society's Closed Claims Project. The commonality of leaders and members of the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation and American Society of Anesthesiologists initiatives provided the strong coordination needed for their efforts to effect change, introduce standards of care and practice parameters, obtain financial support needed to grow patient safety-oriented new knowledge, integrate industry and other relevant leaders outside of anesthesiology, and involve all anesthesia professions. By implementing successful patient safety initiatives, they promoted the recognition that anesthesiology and patient safety are inextricably linked., (Copyright © 2021, the American Society of Anesthesiologists. All Rights Reserved.)

Capnometry, the measurement of respiratory carbon dioxide, is regarded as a highly recommended safety technology in intubated and nonintubated sedated and/or anesthetized patients. Its utility includes confirmation of initial and ongoing placement of an airway device as well as in detecting gas exchange, bronchospasm, airway obstruction, reduced cardiac output, and metabolic changes. The utility applies prehospital and throughout all phases of inhospital care. Unfortunately, capnometry devices are not readily available in many countries, especially those that are resource-limited. Constraining factors include cost, durability of devices, availability of consumables, lack of dependable power supply, difficulty with cleaning, and maintenance. There is, thus, an urgent need for all stakeholders to come together to develop, market, and distribute appropriate devices that address costs and other requirements. To foster this process, the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA) has developed the "WFSA-Minimum Capnometer Specifications 2021." The intent of the specifications is to set the minimum that would be acceptable from industry in their attempts to reduce costs while meeting other needs in resource-constrained regions. The document also includes very desirable and preferred options. The intent is to stimulate interest and engagement among industry, clinical providers, professional associations, and ministries of health to address this important patient safety need. The WFSA-Minimum Capnometer Specifications 2021 is based on the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) capnometer specifications. While industry is familiar with such specifications and their presentation format, most clinicians are not; therefore, this article serves to more clearly explain the requirements. In addition, the specifications as described can be used as a purchasing guide by clinicians., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

In 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic interrupted the administration of the APPLIED Examination, the final part of the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) staged examination system for initial certification. In response, the ABA developed, piloted, and implemented an Internet-based "virtual" form of the examination to allow administration of both components of the APPLIED Exam (Standardized Oral Examination and Objective Structured Clinical Examination) when it was impractical and unsafe for candidates and examiners to travel and have in-person interactions. This article describes the development of the ABA virtual APPLIED Examination, including its rationale, examination format, technology infrastructure, candidate communication, and examiner training. Although the logistics are formidable, we report a methodology for successfully introducing a large-scale, high-stakes, 2-element, remote examination that replicates previously validated assessments., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: The American Board of Anesthesiology administers the APPLIED Examination as a part of initial certification, which as of 2018 includes 2 components-the Standardized Oral Examination (SOE) and the Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE). The goal of this study is to investigate the measurement construct(s) of the APPLIED Examination to assess whether the SOE and the OSCE measure distinct constructs (ie, factors)., Methods: Exploratory item factor analysis of candidates' performance ratings was used to determine the number of constructs, and confirmatory item factor analysis to estimate factor loadings within each construct and correlation(s) between the constructs., Results: In exploratory item factor analysis, the log-likelihood ratio test and Akaike information criterion index favored the 3-factor model, with factors reflecting the SOE, OSCE Communication and Professionalism, and OSCE Technical Skills. The Bayesian information criterion index favored the 2-factor model, with factors reflecting the SOE and the OSCE. In confirmatory item factor analysis, both models suggest moderate correlation between the SOE factor and the OSCE factor; the correlation was 0.49 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.55) for the 3-factor model and 0.61 (95% CI, 0.54-0.64) for the 2-factor model. The factor loadings were lower for Technical Skills stations of the OSCE (ranging from 0.11 to 0.25) compared with those of the SOE and Communication and Professionalism stations of the OSCE (ranging from 0.36 to 0.50)., Conclusions: The analyses provide evidence that the SOE and the OSCE measure distinct constructs, supporting the rationale for administering both components of the APPLIED Examination for initial certification in anesthesiology., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: Lack of access to safe and affordable anesthesia and surgical care is a major contributor to avoidable death and disability across the globe. Effective education initiatives are a viable mechanism to address critical skill and process gaps in perioperative teams. Vital Anaesthesia Simulation Training (VAST) aims to overcome barriers limiting widespread application of simulation-based education (SBE) in resource-limited environments, providing immersive, low-cost, multidisciplinary SBE and simulation facilitator training. There is a dearth of knowledge regarding the factors supporting effective simulation facilitation in resource-limited environments. Frameworks evaluating simulation facilitation in high-income countries (HICs) are unlikely to fully assess the range of skills required by simulation facilitators working in resource-limited environments. This study explores the qualities of effective VAST facilitators; knowledge gained will inform the design of a framework for assessing simulation facilitators working in resource-limited contexts and promote more effective simulation faculty development., Methods: This qualitative study used in-depth interviews to explore VAST facilitators' perspectives on attributes and practices of effective simulation in resource-limited settings. Twenty VAST facilitators were purposively sampled and consented to be interviewed. They represented 6 low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and 3 HICs. Interviews were conducted using a semistructured interview guide. Data analysis involved open coding to inductively identify themes using labels taken from the words of study participants and those from the relevant literature., Results: Emergent themes centered on 4 categories: Persona, Principles, Performance and Progression. Effective VAST facilitators embody a set of traits, style, and personal attributes (Persona) and adhere to certain Principles to optimize the simulation environment, maximize learning, and enable effective VAST Course delivery. Performance describes specific practices that well-trained facilitators demonstrate while delivering VAST courses. Finally, to advance toward competency, facilitators must seek opportunities for skill Progression.Interwoven across categories was the finding that effective VAST facilitators must be cognizant of how context, culture, and language may impact delivery of SBE. The complexity of VAST Course delivery requires that facilitators have a sensitive approach and be flexible, adaptable, and open-minded. To progress toward competency, facilitators must be open to self-reflection, be mentored, and have opportunities for practice., Conclusions: The results from this study will help to develop a simulation facilitator evaluation tool that incorporates cultural sensitivity, flexibility, and a participant-focused educational model, with broad relevance across varied resource-limited environments., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: Although there are thousands of published recommendations in anesthesiology clinical practice guidelines, the extent to which these are supported by high levels of evidence is not known. This study hypothesized that most recommendations in clinical practice guidelines are supported by a low level of evidence., Methods: A registered (Prospero CRD42020202932) systematic review was conducted of anesthesia evidence-based recommendations from the major North American and European anesthesiology societies between January 2010 and September 2020 in PubMed and EMBASE. The level of evidence A, B, or C and the strength of recommendation (strong or weak) for each recommendation was mapped using the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification system or the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system. The outcome of interest was the proportion of recommendations supported by levels of evidence A, B, and C. Changes in the level of evidence over time were examined. Risk of bias was assessed using Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II., Results: In total, 60 guidelines comprising 2,280 recommendations were reviewed. Level of evidence A supported 16% (363 of 2,280) of total recommendations and 19% (288 of 1,506) of strong recommendations. Level of evidence C supported 51% (1,160 of 2,280) of all recommendations and 50% (756 of 1,506) of strong recommendations. Of all the guidelines, 73% (44 of 60) had a low risk of bias. The proportion of recommendations supported by level of evidence A versus level of evidence C (relative risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.18 to 4.74; P = 0.933) or level of evidence B versus level of evidence C (relative risk ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 0.72 to 3.72; P = 0.243) did not increase in guidelines that were revised. Year of publication was also not associated with increases in the proportion of recommendations supported by level of evidence A (relative risk ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.23; P = 0.340) or level of evidence B (relative risk ratio, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.96 to 1.15; P = 0.283) compared to level of evidence C., Conclusions: Half of the recommendations in anesthesiology clinical practice guidelines are based on a low level of evidence, and this did not change over time. These findings highlight the need for additional efforts to increase the quality of evidence used to guide decision-making in anesthesiology., (Copyright © 2021, the American Society of Anesthesiologists. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: Modern medical education requires frequent competency assessment. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) provides a descriptive framework of competencies and milestones but does not provide standardized instruments to assess and track trainee competency over time. Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) represent a workplace-based method to assess the achievement of competency milestones at the point-of-care that can be applied to anesthesiology training in the United States., Methods: Experts in education and competency assessment were recruited to participate in a 6-step process using a modified Delphi method with iterative rounds to reach consensus on an entrustment scale, a list of EPAs and procedural skills, detailed definitions for each EPA, a mapping of the EPAs to the ACGME milestones, and a target level of entrustment for graduating US anesthesiology residents for each EPA and procedural skill. The defined EPAs and procedural skills were implemented using a website and mobile app. The assessment system was piloted at 7 anesthesiology residency programs. After 2 months, faculty were surveyed on their attitudes on usability and utility of the assessment system. The number of evaluations submitted per month was collected for 1 year., Results: Participants in EPA development included 18 education experts from 11 different programs. The Delphi rounds produced a final list of 20 EPAs, each differentiated as simple or complex, a defined entrustment scale, mapping of the EPAs to milestones, and graduation entrustment targets. A list of 159 procedural skills was similarly developed. Results of the faculty survey demonstrated favorable ratings on all questions regarding app usability as well as the utility of the app and EPA assessments. Over the 2-month pilot period, 1636 EPA and 1427 procedure assessments were submitted. All programs continued to use the app for the remainder of the academic year resulting in 12,641 submitted assessments., Conclusions: A list of 20 anesthesiology EPAs and 159 procedural skills assessments were developed using a rigorous methodology to reach consensus among education experts. The assessments were pilot tested at 7 US anesthesiology residency programs demonstrating the feasibility of implementation using a mobile app and the ability to collect assessment data. Adoption at the pilot sites was variable; however, the use of the system was not mandatory for faculty or trainees at any site., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: The US residency application, interview, and match processes are costly and time-intensive. We sought to quantify the importance of an applicant being from the same-state as a residency program in terms of how this impacted the number of interviews needed to match., Methods: We examined data from interview scheduling software used by 32 programs located in 31 US states and 1300 applicants for the US anesthesiology recruitment cycles from 2015 to 2018. Interviewee data (distance from program, region, numbers of interviews, and program at which interview occurred) were analyzed to quantify the effect of the interviewee being from the same state as the residency program on the odds of matching to that program. Other variables of interest (medical school, current address, US Medical Licensing Exam [USMLE] Step 1 and 2 clinical knowledge [CK] scores, Alpha Omega Alpha [AOA] status, medical school ranking) were also examined as controls. Confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for the ratios of odds ratios., Results: An interviewee living in the same state as the interviewing program could have 5.42 fewer total interviews (97.5% CI, 3.02-7.81) while having the same odds of matching. The same state effect had an equivalent value as an approximately 4.14 USMLE points-difference from the program's mean (97.5% CI was 2.34-5.94 USMLE points). Addition of whether the interviewee belonged to an affiliated medical school did not significantly improve the model; same-state remained significant (P < .0001) while affiliated medical school was not (P = .40)., Conclusions: Our analysis of anesthesiology residency recruitment using previously unstudied interview data shows that same-state locality is a viable predictor of residency matching and should be strongly considered when evaluating whether to interview an applicant.

Background: Combined practice in pediatric anesthesiology (PA) and pediatric critical care medicine (PCCM) was historically common but has declined markedly with time. The reasons for this temporal shift are unclear, but existing evidence suggests that length of training is a barrier to contemporary trainees. Among current practitioners, restriction in dual-specialty practice also occurs, for reasons that are unknown at present. We sought to describe the demographics of this population, investigate their perceptions about the field, and consider factors that lead to attrition., Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional, observational study of physicians in the United States with a combined practice in PA and PCCM. The survey was distributed electronically and anonymously to the distribution list of the Pediatric Anesthesia Leadership Council (PALC) of the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia (SPA), directing the recipients to forward the link to their faculty meeting our inclusion criteria. Attending-level respondents (n = 62) completed an anonymous, 40-question multidomain survey., Results: Forty-seven men and 15 women, with a median age of 51, completed the survey. Major leadership positions are held by 44%, and 55% are externally funded investigators. A minority (26%) have given up one or both specialties, citing time constraints and politics as the dominant reasons. Duration of training was cited as the major barrier to entry by 77%. Increasing age and faculty rank and lack of a comparably trained institutional colleague were associated with attrition from dual-specialty practice. The majority (88%) reported that they would do it all again., Conclusions: The current cohort of pediatric anesthesiologist-intensivists in the United States is a small but accomplished group of physicians. Efforts to train, recruit, and retain such providers must address systematic barriers to completion of the requisite training and continued practice.

In 2018, the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) became the first US medical specialty certifying board to incorporate an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) into its initial certification examination system. Previously, the ABA's staged examination system consisted of 2 written examinations (the BASIC and ADVANCED examinations) and the Standardized Oral Examination (SOE). The OSCE and the existing SOE are now 2 separate components of the APPLIED Examination. This report presents the results of the first-year OSCE administration. A total of 1410 candidates took both the OSCE and the SOE in 2018. Candidate performance approximated a normal distribution for both the OSCE and the SOE, and was not associated with the timing of the examination, including day of the week, morning versus afternoon session, and order of the OSCE and the SOE. Practice-based Learning and Improvement was the most difficult station, while Application of Ultrasonography was the least difficult. The correlation coefficient between SOE and OSCE scores was 0.35 ([95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.30-0.39]; P < .001). Scores for the written ADVANCED Examination were modestly correlated with scores for the SOE (r = 0.29 [95% CI, 0.25-0.34]; P < .001) and the OSCE (r = 0.15 [95% CI, 0.10-0.20]; P < .001). Most of the candidates who failed the SOE passed the OSCE, and most of the candidates who failed the OSCE passed the SOE. Of the 1410 candidates, 77 (5.5%) failed the OSCE, 155 (11.0%) failed the SOE, and 25 (1.8%) failed both. Thus, 207 (14.7%) failed at least 1 component of the APPLIED Examination. Adding an OSCE to a board certification examination system is feasible. Preliminary evidence indicates that the OSCE measures aspects of candidate abilities distinct from those measured by other examinations used for initial board certification.

Purpose of Review: Effective and safe regional anaesthesia and pain medicine procedures require clinicians to learn and master complex theoretical knowledge and motor skills. This review aims to summarize articles relevant to education and training in these skill sets in the previous 2 years., Recent Findings: Twenty-two articles were identified, investigating nine out of the 13 top-ranked research topics in education and training in regional anaesthesia. Research topics addressed by these articles included prerotation simulation, deliberate practice combined with formative assessment tools, validation of assessment tools, three-dimensional-printed models, and knowledge translation from simulation to clinical practice. Emerging concepts investigated for their applications in regional anaesthesia included eye-tracking as a surrogate metric when evaluating proficiency, and elastography aiding visual salience to distinguish appropriate perineural and inappropriate intraneural injections., Summary: Research into education and training in regional anaesthesia covered multiple and diverse topics. Methodological limitations were noted in several articles, reflecting the difficulties in designing and conducting medical education studies. Nonetheless, the evidence-base continues to mature and innovations provide exciting future possibilities.

Background: Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) are used in a variety of high-stakes examinations. The primary goal of this study was to examine factors influencing the variability of assessment scores for mock OSCEs administered to senior anesthesiology residents., Methods: Using the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) OSCE Content Outline as a blueprint, scenarios were developed for 4 of the ABA skill types: (1) informed consent, (2) treatment options, (3) interpretation of echocardiograms, and (4) application of ultrasonography. Eight residency programs administered these 4 OSCEs to CA3 residents during a 1-day formative session. A global score and checklist items were used for scoring by faculty raters. We used a statistical framework called generalizability theory, or G-theory, to estimate the sources of variation (or facets), and to estimate the reliability (ie, reproducibility) of the OSCE performance scores. Reliability provides a metric on the consistency or reproducibility of learner performance as measured through the assessment., Results: Of the 115 total eligible senior residents, 99 participated in the OSCE because the other residents were unavailable. Overall, residents correctly performed 84% (standard deviation [SD] 16%, range 38%-100%) of the 36 total checklist items for the 4 OSCEs. On global scoring, the pass rate for the informed consent station was 71%, for treatment options was 97%, for interpretation of echocardiograms was 66%, and for application of ultrasound was 72%. The estimate of reliability expressing the reproducibility of examinee rankings equaled 0.56 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49-0.63), which is reasonable for normative assessments that aim to compare a resident's performance relative to other residents because over half of the observed variation in total scores is due to variation in examinee ability. Phi coefficient reliability of 0.42 (95% CI, 0.35-0.50) indicates that criterion-based judgments (eg, pass-fail status) cannot be made. Phi expresses the absolute consistency of a score and reflects how closely the assessment is likely to reproduce an examinee's final score. Overall, the greatest (14.6%) variance was due to the person by item by station interaction (3-way interaction) indicating that specific residents did well on some items but poorly on other items. The variance (11.2%) due to residency programs across case items was high suggesting moderate variability in performance from residents during the OSCEs among residency programs., Conclusions: Since many residency programs aim to develop their own mock OSCEs, this study provides evidence that it is possible for programs to create a meaningful mock OSCE experience that is statistically reliable for separating resident performance.

Purpose of Review: Nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) cases performed in pediatric patients have increased over the past decade. It is imperative for the anesthesia provider to be familiar with the nuances of this environment and the myriad of cases to ensure delivery of safe and efficient care., Recent Findings: Though case volume has increased, sedative agents have largely remained unchanged. NORA sites must meet the same operating room standards and expectations of anesthesia established by the American Society of Anesthesiologists. Despite the increasing NORA volume and efforts to instill a similar culture of safety as the operating room complex, NORA cases present challenges with limited resources and access to the patient, highlighting the need for resident and fellow training to include NORA experiences., Summary: Experience working in the NORA environment helps provide, maintain, and improve the cognitive fitness and resilience that an anesthesiologist needs to tackle the complexities from the variety of NORA cases and locations. Patient factors aside, procedural considerations can affect the anesthetic plan, so understanding the nuances of the procedure helps the anesthesia provider provide safe and efficient care.

Purpose of Review: This article provides an overview of standard procedures currently performed in nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) and highlights anesthetic implications., Recent Findings: Novel noninvasive interventional procedures remain on the rise, accelerating demand for anesthesia support outside the conventional operating room. The field of interventional oncology has introduced a variety of effective minimally invasive therapies making interventional radiology gain a major role in the management of cancer. Technical innovation brings newer ablative and embolotherapy techniques into practice. Flexible bronchoscopy has replaced rigid bronchoscopy for many diagnostic and therapeutic indications. Endobronchial ultrasonography now allows sampling of mediastinal, paratracheal, or subcarinal lymph nodes rendering more invasive procedures such as mediastinoscopy unnecessary. Similarly, endoscopic ultrasonosgraphy currently plays a central position in the management of gastrointestinal disease. Sophisticated catheter techniques for ablating cardiac arrhythmias have become state of the art; Watchman procedure gaining position in the prevention of stroke resulting from atrial fibrillation., Summary: NORA is a rapidly evolving field in anesthesia. Employing new technology to treat a wide variety of diseases brings new challenges to the anesthesiologist. Better understanding of emerging interventional techniques is key to safe practice and allows the anesthesia expert to be at the forefront of this swiftly expanding multidisciplinary arena.

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this review is to provide an update on how best to manage the investigation of suspected perioperative hypersensitivity reactions based on recent literature and key publications., Recent Findings: In the past two years, several very important initiatives have been taken in the field of perioperative hypersensitivity. The 6th national audit project in the United Kingdom has provided new knowledge through a series of studies, including a nationwide prospective study, and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has commissioned a position paper with updated recommendations for investigations. Lastly, a large international working group comprising experts in anesthesiology, allergology, and immunology, the International Suspected Perioperative Allergic Reactions group, has published a series of articles providing updates and new insights into several different key areas of perioperative hypersensitivity., Summary: The investigation of perioperative hypersensitivity reactions is highly complex and aims to identify the correct culprit to ensure future avoidance but also to disprove allergy to other suspected culprits, making them available for subsequent anesthesia. To achieve this, close collaboration between anesthesiologists and allergists is called upon to ensure the best possible outcome for the patient.

Background: While 4 to 10% of medications administered in the operating room may involve an error, few investigations have prospectively modeled how these errors might occur. Systems theoretic process analysis is a prospective risk analysis technique that uses systems theory to identify hazards. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the use of systems theoretic process analysis in a healthcare organization to prospectively identify causal factors for medication errors in the operating room., Methods: The authors completed a systems theoretic process analysis for the medication use process in the operating room at their institution. First, the authors defined medication-related accidents (adverse medication events) and hazards and created a hierarchical control structure (a schematic representation of the operating room medication use system). Then the authors analyzed this structure for unsafe control actions and causal scenarios that could lead to medication errors, incorporating input from surgeons, anesthesiologists, and pharmacists. The authors studied the entire medication use process, including requesting medications, dispensing, preparing, administering, documenting, and monitoring patients for the effects. Results were reported using descriptive statistics., Results: The hierarchical control structure involved three tiers of controllers: perioperative leadership; management of patient care by the attending anesthesiologist, surgeon, and pharmacist; and execution of patient care by the anesthesia clinician in the operating room. The authors identified 66 unsafe control actions linked to 342 causal scenarios that could lead to medication errors. Eighty-two (24.0%) scenarios came from perioperative leadership, 103 (30.1%) from management of patient care, and 157 (45.9%) from execution of patient care., Conclusions: In this study, the authors demonstrated the use of systems theoretic process analysis to describe potential causes of errors in the medication use process in the operating room. Causal scenarios were linked to controllers ranging from the frontline providers up to the highest levels of perioperative management. Systems theoretic process analysis is uniquely able to analyze management and leadership impacts on the system, making it useful for guiding quality improvement initiatives.

Perioperative medicine is changing from a "protocol-based" approach to a progressively personalized care model. New molecular techniques and comprehensive perioperative medical records allow for detection of patient-specific phenotypes that may better explain, or even predict, a patient's response to perioperative stress and anesthetic care. Basic science technology has significantly evolved in recent years with the advent of powerful approaches that have translational relevance. It is incumbent on us as a primarily clinical specialty to have an in-depth understanding of rapidly evolving underlying basic science techniques to incorporate such approaches into our own research, critically interpret the literature, and improve future anesthesia patient care. This review focuses on 3 important and most likely practice-changing basic science techniques: next-generation sequencing (NGS), clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR) modulations, and inducible pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs). Each technique will be described, potential advantages and limitations discussed, open questions and challenges addressed, and future developments outlined. We hope to provide insight for practicing physicians when confronted with basic science articles and encourage investigators to apply "state-of-the-art" technology to their future experiments.

Purpose of Review: With an ageing population, mounting pressure on the healthcare dollar, significant advances in medical technology, and now in the context of coronavirus disease 2019, the traditional paradigm in which operative procedures are undertaken is changing. Increasingly, procedures are performed in more distant, isolated and less familiar locations, challenging anaesthesiologists and requiring well developed situational awareness. This review looks at implications for the practitioner and patient safety, outlining considerations and steps involved in translation of systems and processes well established in the operating room to more unfamiliar environments., Recent Findings: Despite limited nonoperating room anaesthesia outcome data, analysis of malpractice claims, anaesthesia-related medical disputes and clinical outcome registries have suggested higher morbidity and mortality. Complications were often associated with suboptimal monitoring, nonadherence to recommended guidelines and sedationist or nonanaesthesiologist caregivers. More recently, clear monitoring guidelines, global patient safety initiatives and widespread implementation of cognitive aids may have contributed to nonoperating room anaesthesia (NORA) outcomes approaching that of traditional operating rooms., Summary: As NORA caseloads increase, understanding structural and anaesthetic requirements is essential to patient safety. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 pandemic has provided an opportunity for anaesthesiologists to implement lessons learned from previous analyses, share expertise as patient safety leaders and provide valuable input into protecting patients and caregivers.

Purpose of Review: Advances in early diagnosis and treatment of diseases using minimally invasive procedures has led to an increase in the number of cases in locations outside the operating room. This surge created the need for anesthesia services to expand to these areas to provide well tolerated and favorable procedural conditions. The present review describes nonoperating room anesthesia patterns in different parts of the world., Recent Findings: Nonoperating room anesthesia has grown exponentially over the last years. Patients scheduled in these areas are sicker and older compared to the operating room patients. Anesthesiologist-directed care has proven to be well tolerated, with less serious complications and improvement in patients and proceduralist satisfaction., Summary: There are marked variations in how anesthesia services are delivered in out of operating room locations in different parts of the world. Although there are some data available from the United States, expansion of minimally invasive procedures across continents will likely lead to the emergence of various models of delivering anesthetic care.

Purpose of Review: To provide aids to deal with increasing amount of several comorbidities in nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA)., Recent Findings: New indexes for assessment of comorbidities are described and guidelines for the care of patients with obesity, obstructive sleep apnea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes and COVID19 in NORA summarized., Summary: In addition to ASA classification, such instruments as Charlson Comorbidity Index, Frailty Index, Surgical Complexity Score and Revised Cardiac Risk could supplement the prospective assessment of the risk of comorbidities. Using institutional protocols patients with significant obesity, obstructive sleep apnea, COPD, diabetes and COVID19 can be safely cared in NORA. However, the individual functioning and the severity are more important than only the number of diseases.

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) pandemic has challenged medical systems and clinicians globally to unforeseen levels. Rapid spread of COVID-19 has forced clinicians to care for patients with a highly contagious disease without evidence-based guidelines. Using a virtual modified nominal group technique, the Pediatric Difficult Intubation Collaborative (PeDI-C), which currently includes 35 hospitals from 6 countries, generated consensus guidelines on airway management in pediatric anesthesia based on expert opinion and early data about the disease. PeDI-C identified overarching goals during care, including minimizing aerosolized respiratory secretions, minimizing the number of clinicians in contact with a patient, and recognizing that undiagnosed asymptomatic patients may shed the virus and infect health care workers. Recommendations include administering anxiolytic medications, intravenous anesthetic inductions, tracheal intubation using video laryngoscopes and cuffed tracheal tubes, use of in-line suction catheters, and modifying workflow to recover patients from anesthesia in the operating room. Importantly, PeDI-C recommends that anesthesiologists consider using appropriate personal protective equipment when performing aerosol-generating medical procedures in asymptomatic children, in addition to known or suspected children with COVID-19. Airway procedures should be done in negative pressure rooms when available. Adequate time should be allowed for operating room cleaning and air filtration between surgical cases. Research using rigorous study designs is urgently needed to inform safe practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. Until further information is available, PeDI-C advises that clinicians consider these guidelines to enhance the safety of health care workers during airway management when performing aerosol-generating medical procedures. These guidelines have been endorsed by the Society for Pediatric Anesthesia and the Canadian Pediatric Anesthesia Society.

The coronavirus disease 2019, named COVID-19 officially by the World Health Organization (Geneva, Switzerland) on February 12, 2020, has spread at unprecedented speed. After the first outbreak in Wuhan, China, Chinese anesthesiologists encountered increasing numbers of infected patients since December 2019. Because the main route of transmission is via respiratory droplets and close contact, anesthesia providers are at a high risk when responding to the devastating mass emergency. So far, actions have been taken including but not limited to nationwide actions and online education regarding special procedures of airway management, oxygen therapy, ventilation support, hemodynamic management, sedation, and analgesia. As the epidemic situation has lasted for months (thus far), special platforms have also been set up to provide free mental health care to all anesthesia providers participating in acute and critical caring for COVID-19 patients. The current article documents the actions taken, lesson learned, and future work needed.

Background: The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA-PS) classification system is used worldwide to classify patients based on comorbid conditions before general anesthesia. Despite its popularity, the ASA-PS classification system has been shown to have poor interrater reliability due to its subjective definitions, especially when applied to the pediatric population. We hypothesized that the clarification of ASA-PS definitions to better reflect pediatric conditions would improve the accuracy of ASA-PS applied to this population., Methods: A stratified, randomized sample of 120 pediatric surgical cases was collected from a tertiary-care pediatric hospital. A team of senior anesthesiologists reclassified ASA-PS within this patient sample using the suggested pediatric-specific ASA-PS definitions. Interrater reliability was measured using intraclass correlation (ICC) and Fleiss κ statistic. In addition, a qualitative study component using small focus groups of senior anesthesiologists identified areas of ambiguity within the ASA-PS system., Results: Among the 90 reclassifications within each ASA-PS group, 42.2% (n = 38) of ASA-PS I were upgraded to ASA-PS II, and 36.7% (n = 33) of ASA-PS II were upgraded to ASA-PS III. In addition, 28.9% (n = 26) of ASA-PS III were upgraded to ASA-PS IV, and 24.4% (n = 22) of ASA-PS IV were downgraded to III. ICC across the reclassified ASA-PS categories was 0.77 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-0.83; P < .001) demonstrating strong overall agreement. Fleiss κ statistic was lowest in ASA-PS II and III patients (κ = 0.41 and κ = 0.30, respectively) indicating lower agreement beyond chance within these subgroups. Focus groups revealed common themes such as active sequelae of disease, active versus well-controlled presence of comorbidities, and the possible inclusion of functional limitations as important considerations., Conclusions: The ASA-PS classification system has several benefits including ease-of-use, simplicity, and flexibility. However, revising the ASA-PS system to provide better guidance for pediatric patients could be valuable. While this study demonstrates good interrater reliability with the included ASA-PS pediatric definitions, further work is needed to clarify accurate assignment of ASA-PS within the midrange of the scale (ASA-PS II and III) and explore its implementation in other institutions.

Frailty is a multidimensional syndrome characterized by decreased reserve and diminished resistance to stressors. People with frailty are vulnerable to stressors, and exposure to the stress of surgery is associated with increased risk of adverse outcomes and higher levels of resource use. As Western populations age rapidly, older people with frailty are presenting for surgery with increasing frequency. This means that anesthesiologists and other perioperative clinicians need to be familiar with frailty, its assessment, manifestations, and strategies for optimization. We present a narrative review of frailty aimed at perioperative clinicians. The review will familiarize readers with the concept of frailty, will discuss common and feasible approaches to frailty assessment before surgery, and will describe the relative and absolute associations of frailty with commonly measured adverse outcomes, including morbidity and mortality, as well as patient-centered and reported outcomes related to function, disability, and quality of life. A proposed approach to optimization before surgery is presented, which includes frailty assessment followed by recommendations for identification of underlying physical disability, malnutrition, cognitive dysfunction, and mental health diagnoses. Overall, 30%-50% of older patients presenting for major surgery will be living with frailty, which results in a more than 2-fold increase in risk of morbidity, mortality, and development of new patient-reported disability. The Clinical Frailty Scale appears to be the most feasible frailty instrument for use before surgery; however, evidence suggests that predictive accuracy does not differ significantly between frailty instruments such as the Fried Phenotype, Edmonton Frail Scale, and Frailty Index. Identification of physical dysfunction may allow for optimization via exercise prehabilitation, while nutritional supplementation could be considered with a positive screen for malnutrition. The Hospital Elder Life Program shows promise for delirium prevention, while individuals with mental health and or other psychosocial stressors may derive particular benefit from multidisciplinary care and preadmission discharge planning. Robust trials are still required to provide definitive evidence supporting these interventions and minimal data are available to guide management during the intra- and postoperative phases. Improving the care and outcomes of older people with frailty represents a key opportunity for anesthesiologists and perioperative scientists.

Healthcare systems worldwide are responding to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), an emerging infectious syndrome caused by the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus. Patients with COVID-19 can progress from asymptomatic or mild illness to hypoxemic respiratory failure or multisystem organ failure, necessitating intubation and intensive care management. Healthcare providers, and particularly anesthesiologists, are at the frontline of this epidemic, and they need to be aware of the best available evidence to guide therapeutic management of patients with COVID-19 and to keep themselves safe while doing so. Here, the authors review COVID-19 pathogenesis, presentation, diagnosis, and potential therapeutics, with a focus on management of COVID-19-associated respiratory failure. The authors draw on literature from other viral epidemics, treatment of acute respiratory distress syndrome, and recent publications on COVID-19, as well as guidelines from major health organizations. This review provides a comprehensive summary of the evidence currently available to guide management of critically ill patients with COVID-19.