Search

Background: The objective of this study was to provide a synthesis of the interventions designed to reduce medication errors in anesthetized patients., Methods: We electronically searched major databases using index and free-text keywords related to anesthesia and medication errors. We included cohort studies exploring interventions to reduce anesthetic medication errors in both adult and pediatric patients. The risk of bias for each study was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale., Results: One thousand five-hundred and fifty-eight titles or abstracts were screened, and 56 full-text studies were assessed for eligibility; eight studies were included in the final analysis. Case reports and retrospective studies were excluded. The quality of most studies (n = 6) was graded as "low". There were three categories of interventions: I) multimodal interventions (6 studies, n = 900,170 medication administrations) showed a reduction in rates of errors of 21-35% per administration and 37-41% per anesthetic; II) improved labels (1 study, n = 55,426 medication administrations) resulted in a 37% reduction in rates of errors per anesthetic; and III) the effect of education was assessed in one study and showed no effect., Conclusion: Multimodal interventions and improved labelling reduce medication errors in anesthetized patients.

Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common comorbidity in patients undergoing surgical procedures. Patients with OSA are at heightened risk of postoperative complications. Current treatments for OSA focus on alleviating upper airway collapse due to impaired upper airway anatomy. Although impaired upper airway anatomy is the primary cause of OSA, the pathogenesis of OSA is highly variable from person to person. In many patients, nonanatomical traits play a critical role in the development of OSA. There are 4 key traits or "phenotypes" that contribute to OSA pathogenesis. In addition to (1) impaired upper airway anatomy, nonanatomical contributors include: (2) impaired upper airway dilator muscle responsiveness; (3) low respiratory arousal threshold (waking up too easily to minor airway narrowing); and (4) unstable control of breathing (high loop gain). Each of these phenotypes respond differently to postoperative factors, such as opioid medications. An understanding of these phenotypes and their highly varied interactions with postoperative risk factors is key to providing safer personalized care for postoperative patients with OSA. Accordingly, this review describes the 4 OSA phenotypes, highlights how the impact on OSA severity from postoperative risk factors, such as opioids and other sedatives, is influenced by OSA phenotypes, and outlines how this knowledge can be applied to provide individualized care to minimize postoperative risk in surgical patients with OSA., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: See Disclosures at the end of the article., (Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.)

Background: Patients with narcolepsy may be at increased perioperative risk due to the interactions among anesthesia, narcolepsy, and narcolepsy medications. This study sought to determine the perioperative experience of narcoleptic patients undergoing anesthesia or sedation, the frequency of perioperative counseling, and self-reported surgical complications., Methods: A 22-question survey was developed by expert consensus and distributed by the Narcolepsy Network. Recruitment was via the Narcolepsy Network's list-serve and a Facebook link to the survey. One thousand and twenty respondents reported a diagnosis of narcolepsy and 1 or more procedures under anesthesia or sedation. Descriptive, comparative statistics and logistic regression were utilized., Results: Respondents were mostly women (79.5%) and Caucasian (84.9%), with a mean age of 45 ± 16 years. Most respondents did not receive counseling regarding the possibility of increased sleepiness (70%), cataplexy (90%), or drowsy driving (59%) postanesthesia. More than half of respondents reported adverse events (medication withdrawal symptoms, inadequate pain relief, increased cataplexy). Subjects with cataplexy more frequently reported surgical complications (70% vs 31%; P = .03) and medication withdrawal symptoms (stimulant medications: odds ratio, 3.0 [95% CI, 1.9, 3.06]; P > .001 and antidepressant medications: odds ratio, 6.5 [95% CI, 2.1-19.5]; P = .001). Of the total sample, 18% indicated surgical complications. Undergoing 5 or more separate surgeries or procedures was associated with a 2-fold increase in self-reported complications (odds ratio, 2.2 [95% CI, 1.3-3.4]; P = .001), difficulty waking (odds ratio, 2.1 [95% CI, 1.45-3.06]; P = .001), and inadequate pain relief (odds ratio, 1.77 [95% CI, 1.01-3.13]; P < .05)., Conclusions: Most narcoleptic patients report not receiving counseling regarding potential worsening of narcolepsy symptoms postanesthesia or an increased risk of drowsy driving. Enhanced education of perioperative providers about potential narcolepsy-related issues is essential. Respondents frequently self-report adverse events in the perioperative period. Future studies should clarify the perioperative risk associated with narcolepsy to optimize the care and safety of narcoleptic patients.

The purpose of the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine Guideline on Intraoperative Management of Adult Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) is to present recommendations based on current scientific evidence. This guideline seeks to address questions regarding the intraoperative care of patients with OSA, including airway management, anesthetic drug and agent effects, and choice of anesthesia type. Given the paucity of high-quality studies with regard to study design and execution in this perioperative field, recommendations were to a large part developed by subject-matter experts through consensus processes, taking into account the current scientific knowledge base and quality of evidence. This guideline may not be suitable for all clinical settings and patients and is not intended to define standards of care or absolute requirements for patient care; thus, assessment of appropriateness should be made on an individualized basis. Adherence to this guideline cannot guarantee successful outcomes, but recommendations should rather aid health care professionals and institutions to formulate plans and develop protocols for the improvement of the perioperative care of patients with OSA, considering patient-related factors, interventions, and resource availability. Given the groundwork of a comprehensive systematic literature review, these recommendations reflect the current state of knowledge and its interpretation by a group of experts at the time of publication. While periodic reevaluations of literature are needed, novel scientific evidence between updates should be taken into account. Deviations in practice from the guideline may be justifiable and should not be interpreted as a basis for claims of negligence.

Background: Narcolepsy is a rare sleep disorder characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness, sleep paralysis, and/or hypnagogic/hypnopompic hallucinations, and in some cases cataplexy. The response to anesthetic medications and possible interactions in narcolepsy patients is unclear in the perioperative period. In this systematic review, we aim to evaluate the current evidence on the perioperative outcomes and anesthetic considerations in narcolepsy patients., Methods: Electronic literature search of Medline, Medline in-process, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases, international conference proceedings, and abstracts was conducted in November 2015 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols guideline. A total of 3757 articles were screened using a 2-stage strategy (title-abstract followed by full text). We included case studies/series, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials of narcolepsy patients undergoing surgical procedures under anesthesia or sedation. Preoperative narcolepsy symptoms and sleep study data, anesthetic technique, and perioperative complications were extracted. Screening of articles, data extraction, and compilation were conducted by 2 independent reviewers and any conflict was resolved by the senior author., Results: A total of 19 studies including 16 case reports and 3 case series were included and evaluated. The majority of these patients received general anesthesia, whereas a small percentage of patients received regional anesthesia. Reported complications of narcolepsy patients undergoing surgeries were mainly related to autonomic dysregulation, or worsening of narcolepsy symptoms intra/postoperatively. Narcolepsy symptoms worsened only in those patient populations where the preoperative medications were either discontinued or reduced (mainly in obstetric patients). In narcolepsy patients, use of depth of anesthesia monitoring and total intravenous technique may have some advantage in terms of safety profile. Several patients undergoing neurosurgery involving the hypothalamus or third or four ventricles developed new-onset narcolepsy., Conclusions: We found a paucity of prospective clinical trials in this patient population, as most of the studies were case reports or observational studies. Continuation of preoperative medications, depth of anesthesia monitoring, use of multimodal analgesia with short-acting agents and regional anesthesia techniques were associated with favorable outcomes. Obstetric patients may be at greater risk for worsening narcolepsy symptoms, possibly related to a reduction or discontinuation of medications. For neurosurgical procedures involving the hypothalamus or third and fourth ventricle, postoperative considerations should include monitoring for symptoms of narcolepsy. Future studies are needed to better define perioperative risks associated with anesthesia and surgery in this population of patients.

Anaesthesia and sleep are different states of unconsciousness with considerable physiological common ground. Because of their shared depressant effects on muscle activation and ventilatory drive, patients with anatomically compromised airways will tend to obstruct in either state and those with impaired ventilatory capacity will tend to hypoventilate. Breathing behaviour in one state is predictive of that in the other. An essential difference is that while arousal responses are preserved during sleep, they are depressed during sedation and abolished by anaesthesia. This renders patients with sleep-related breathing disorders vulnerable to hypoventilation and asphyxia when deeply sedated. Addressing this vulnerability requires a systematic approach to identification of patients and circumstances that magnify this risk, and methods of managing it that seek to reconcile the need for safety with cost-effective use of resources., (© 2016 Asian Pacific Society of Respirology.)

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a prevalent sleep-disordered breathing with potential long-term major neurocognitive and cardiovascular sequelae. The pathophysiology of OSA varies between individuals and is composed of different underlying mechanisms. Several components including the upper airway anatomy, effectiveness of the upper airway dilator muscles such as the genioglossus, arousal threshold of the individual, and inherent stability of the respiratory control system determine the pathogenesis of OSA. Their recognition may have implications for the perioperative health care team. For example, OSA patients with a high arousal threshold are likely to be sensitive to sedatives and narcotics with a higher risk of respiratory arrest in the perioperative period. Supplemental oxygen therapy can help to stabilize breathing in OSA patients with inherent respiratory instability. Avoidance of supine position can minimize airway obstruction in patients with a predisposition to upper airway collapse in this posture. In this review, the clinically relevant endotypes and phenotypes of OSA are described. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy is the treatment of choice for most patients with OSA but tolerance and adherence can be a problem. Patient-centered individualized approaches to OSA management will be the focus of future research into developing potential treatment options that will help decrease the disease burden and improve treatment effectiveness.

The purpose of the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine guideline on preoperative screening and assessment of adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is to present recommendations based on the available clinical evidence on the topic where possible. As very few well-performed randomized studies in this field of perioperative care are available, most of the recommendations were developed by experts in the field through consensus processes involving utilization of evidence grading to indicate the level of evidence upon which recommendations were based. This guideline may not be appropriate for all clinical situations and all patients. The decision whether to follow these recommendations must be made by a responsible physician on an individual basis. Protocols should be developed by individual institutions taking into account the patients' conditions, extent of interventions and available resources. This practice guideline is not intended to define standards of care or represent absolute requirements for patient care. The adherence to these guidelines cannot in any way guarantee successful outcomes and is rather meant to help individuals and institutions formulate plans to better deal with the challenges posed by perioperative patients with OSA. These recommendations reflect the current state of knowledge and its interpretation by a group of experts in the field at the time of publication. While these guidelines will be periodically updated, new information that becomes available between updates should be taken into account. Deviations in practice from guidelines may be justifiable and such deviations should not be interpreted as a basis for claims of negligence.

Context: Previous research has shown that most patients are satisfied with their anaesthetic care. For those who are not the causes may be multifactorial including dissatisfaction with surgical outcomes., Objectives: We aimed to identify whether quality of recovery after anaesthesia and surgery measured in multiple domains affects patient satisfaction., Design: Sub-group analysis of previously published observational cohort study of quality of recovery after surgery (using the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale) was used to identify predictors of incomplete satisfaction 3 days after surgery., Setting: Multicentre perioperative surgery., Patients: Patients ≥6 years old, undergoing a variety of operation types and all receiving general anaesthesia., Observations: Of 701 patients, 573 completed the satisfaction question on day 3. Satisfaction was rated by a single five-point rating question. Patients were divided into two groups: 477 (83%) were completely satisfied and 96 (17%) were not completely satisfied. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed on preoperative and patient characteristics and recovery in five domains as follows: physiological, nociceptive (pain and nausea), emotive (anxiety and depression), activities of daily living and cognition. Recovery was defined as return to baseline values or better for all questions within each domain., Results: Incomplete satisfaction was predicted by persistent pain or nausea at day 3 [OR 8.2 (95% CI 2.5 to 27), P<0.01] and incomplete satisfaction at day 1 [OR 28 (95% CI 10 to 77), P<0.01]. Paradoxically, incomplete satisfaction was less likely to occur if pain or nausea was present 15 min after surgery [OR 0.34 (95% CI 0.11 to 0.99), P<0.05] or at day 1 [OR 0.30 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.91), P=0.03]. Incomplete recovery in the other domains did not influence satisfaction., Conclusion: Of the recovery domains measured using the Postoperative Quality of Recovery Scale, only nociception (pain or nausea) contributed to incomplete satisfaction.

Purpose of Review: The purpose of this article is to discuss the anesthetic considerations of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients undergoing ambulatory surgery and the current recommendations based on recent evidence., Recent Findings: It is documented that 75% of patients with high propensity for OSA were not diagnosed prior to ambulatory surgery. An OSA screening questionnaire, the STOP-Bang questionnaire, may be useful to identify patients who have high risk of OSA. Patients with mild-to-moderate OSA with optimized comorbid condition should be able to safely undergo ambulatory surgery. However, severe OSA patients without optimized comorbid conditions are not ideal candidates for ambulatory surgery. Recently, transient oxygen desaturation in postanesthetic care unit has been described in OSA patients with no further increase in unanticipated hospital admission after ambulatory surgery. However, OSA patients undergoing ambulatory upper airway surgery often have lower threshold for hospitalization. A majority of OSA patients are undergoing ambulatory surgery safely. Careful choice of OSA patients, the use of short-acting anesthetic agents with increased perioperative vigilance helps to reduce the adverse cardiopulmonary events in the ambulatory anesthetic settings. Facilities for inpatient admission of OSA patients when necessary should be available. It may not be safe to discharge severe OSA patients who require narcotic analgesics in the postoperative period., Summary: The recent publications indicated that the majority of OSA patients may be done as ambulatory surgical patients with few adverse events. However, it may not be safe to do patients with severe OSA requiring postoperative narcotics as ambulatory surgical patients.

Obstructive sleep apnea is the most prevalent breathing disturbance in sleep. It is linked to a host of preexisting medical conditions, and associated with poorer postoperative outcomes. Screening and vigilance during the preoperative assessment identifies patients at high risk of obstructive sleep apnea. Further diagnostic tests may be performed, and plans can be made for tailored intraoperative care. The STOP and the STOP-Bang questionnaires are useful screening tools. Patients with a known diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea should be seen in the preoperative clinic, where risk stratification and optimization may be done before surgery. This review article presents functional algorithms for the perioperative management of obstructive sleep apnea based on limited clinical evidence, and a collation of expert knowledge and practices. These recommendations may be used to assist the anesthesiologist in decision-making when managing the patient with obstructive sleep apnea., (Copyright (c) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Patient satisfaction has become an important component of quality improvement in ambulatory anesthesia services. However, it is difficult to measure due to its subjective and complex psychological construct. Psychometric methodology has been successfully used to evaluate this outcome. The authors conducted a systematic review to evaluate questionnaires to measure patient satisfaction with ambulatory anesthesia., Methods: A systematic literature search of The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, HAPI, PsycINFO, and Dissertation Abstracts was performed to identify studies on questionnaires evaluating patient satisfaction after ambulatory anesthesia. The authors included the articles that used multiple-item questionnaires, and the questionnaires were assessed with the strategy of psychometric questionnaire construction, validity, reliability, and acceptability., Results: The authors scanned 131 articles yielded by our search strategy. Eleven articles were included in the study. Two questionnaires, IOWA Satisfaction with Anesthesia Scale and Evaluation du Vecu de I'Anesthesie Generale, fulfilled the criteria, but the latter was not developed specifically for ambulatory anesthesia, whereas Iowa Satisfaction with Anesthesia Scale was designed only for monitored anesthesia patients., Conclusions: In a large number of trials, patient satisfaction has been evaluated using overall satisfaction or nonvalidated questionnaires. Only a few studies have developed questionnaires with rigorous psychometric methods to measure patient satisfaction with anesthesia care. At this time, there is still no valid or reliable questionnaire for measuring patient satisfaction in ambulatory anesthesia. Further study should be conducted to develop standardized instruments to measure this outcome.

Background: It is increasingly important to evaluate patients' recovery after ambulatory surgery. The authors developed the Functional Recovery Index (FRI) to assess postdischarge functional recovery for ambulatory surgical patients., Methods: The scale development involved four phases: item generation, item selection, reliability, and validity testing. A draft questionnaire was tested and revised. Items were selected through testing endorsement frequency, factor analysis, and testing internal consistency. The interrater reliability was calculated. Construct validity was tested by multiple hypotheses on convergent validity, extreme groups, and discriminant validity. Responsiveness was assessed by measuring the FRI postoperatively and comparing minor versus more extensive surgery. The rate of response and the time for completion of the questionnaire were recorded., Results: The final questionnaire had 14 items grouped under 3 factors. Each item was scored from 0 to 10, with 0 = no difficulty and 10 = extreme difficulty with the activity. The 3 factors were summated for a total score. Internal consistency for the 3 factors (pain and social activity, lower limb activity, and general physical activity) was as follows: Cronbach alpha = 0.90, 0.89, and 0.86, respectively. Interrater reliability was 0.99. Convergent validity for FRI versus verbal rating scale pain score was 0.76. Discriminant validity testing showed that the type of surgery was significant and that intermediate (beta = 0.138) and major surgery (beta = 0.337) were associated with higher FRI scores than minor surgery. The time to complete the questionnaires ranged between 4 min 10 s and 4 min 35 s., Conclusions: The FRI had excellent reliability, good validity, responsiveness, and acceptability, indicating that this questionnaire will be a good instrument for assessing functional recovery of ambulatory surgical patients.

The present guidelines were compiled by a multidisciplinary international panel of individuals with interest and expertise in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) under the auspices of The Society of Ambulatory Anesthesia. The panel critically evaluated the current medical literature on PONV to provide an evidence-based reference tool for the management of adults and children who are undergoing surgery and are at increased risk for PONV. In brief, these guidelines identify risk factors for PONV in adults and children; recommend approaches for reducing baseline risks for PONV; identify the most effective antiemetic monotherapy and combination therapy regimens for PONV prophylaxis; recommend approaches for treatment of PONV when it occurs; and provide an algorithm for the management of individuals at increased risk for PONV.

Purpose: To identify and characterize the evidence supporting decisions made in the care of patients with selected medical conditions undergoing ambulatory anesthesia and surgery. Conditions highlighted in this review include: the elderly, heart transplantation, hyper-reactive airway disease, coronary artery disease, and obstructive sleep apnea., Source: A structured search of MEDLINE (1966-2003) was performed using keywords for ambulatory surgery and patient condition. Selected articles were assigned a level of evidence using Centre for Evidence Based Medicine (CEBM) criteria. Recommendations were also graded using CEBM criteria., Principal Findings: The elderly may safely undergo ambulatory surgery but are at increased risk for hemodynamic variation in the operating room. The heart transplant recipient is at increased risk of coronary artery disease and renal insufficiency and should undergo careful preoperative evaluation. The patient with reactive airway disease is at increased risk of minor respiratory complications and should be encouraged to quit smoking. The patient with coronary artery disease and recent myocardial infarction may undergo ambulatory surgery without stress testing if functional capacity is adequate. The patient with obstructive sleep apnea is at increased risk of difficult tracheal intubation but the likelihood of airway obstruction and apnea following ambulatory surgery is unknown., Conclusion: Ambulatory anesthesia is infrequently associated with adverse outcomes, however, knowledge regarding specific patient conditions is of generally low quality. Few prospective trials are available to guide management decisions.

Unlabelled: Consent for clinical anesthesia research trials is often sought on the day of surgery when patients are most anxious and have little privacy or time for reflection. We conducted a retrospective survey of patients' perceptions and concerns regarding consent for clinical anesthesia trials on the day of surgery. Questionnaires were mailed to 175 patients who had participated in 1 of 6 negligible- or minimal-risk clinical anesthesia trials within the preceding year. Seventy-six patients responded (43%). Most patients (80%) reported that they understood the purpose of their trial, did not feel obligated (61%) or pressured (67%) to participate, and were satisfied (mean visual analog scale: 71 mm) with the recruitment and consent process on the day of surgery. Few patients (7%) believed that their well-being was put at risk because of their participation in the trial., Implications: This retrospective survey suggests that patient recruitment and consent for negligible- or minimal-risk clinical anesthesia research trials is appropriate when performed on the day of surgery.

Unlabelled: We designed this study to evaluate postural stability in outpatients after either desflurane or propofol anesthesia. After IRB approval, 120 consenting women undergoing gynecological laparoscopic procedures were randomly assigned to receive either desflurane or propofol-based general anesthesia. After surgery, patients' postural stability was measured as body sway velocity by using a computerized force platform in the following conditions: 1) standing on a firm surface with eyes open versus closed and 2) standing on a foam surface with eyes open versus closed. These measurements were made before anesthesia, immediately after the patient achieved a Post-Anesthesia Discharge Score of 9, and at actual discharge home. At the time patients first achieved a Post-Anesthesia Discharge Score of 9, the body sway in the Propofol group was significantly more than in the Desflurane group when patients were asked to stand on a foam surface with eyes closed (testing the ability of using vestibular information for balance control). We concluded that the desflurane-based anesthetic was associated with better postural control than the propofol-based anesthetic in the early recovery period after outpatient gynecological laparoscopic procedures., Implications: The residual effects of the short-acting general anesthetics desflurane and propofol on patient's balance function during recovery after surgery were assessed with a computerized force platform. The results showed that desflurane seemed to be associated with better postural control than propofol in the early recovery period.

Elderly patients still have the highest postoperative mortality and morbidity rate in the adult surgical population. Preoperative clinical assessment to detect patients at high risk of postoperative events, and specific intraoperative and postoperative anaesthesia management are important to minimize postoperative adverse events in the elderly.

Ambulatory surgery is growing worldwide. The challenge of providing anaesthesia for longer and more complex surgery in sicker and elderly patients is a reality. To maintain the safety and good outcomes of ambulatory anaesthesia, high-risk patients will need to be evaluated carefully. Anaesthetic techniques that use short-acting drugs and minimize postoperative morbidity and mortality should become the focus. Policies on management of postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, voiding and discharge from hospital will maintain good outcome measures.

Background: Patient satisfaction is one of the variables that affect the outcome of health care and the use of health-care services. As more procedures are performed on an ambulatory basis, the role of the anesthesiologist becomes more important. To improve the delivery of care, the predictors of dissatisfaction with the entire process (global dissatisfaction) of ambulatory surgery and with anesthesia itself must be identified. The authors conducted a hypothesis-generating study to identify predictors; specifically, they hypothesized that satisfaction with anesthesia was a predictor of global satisfaction with ambulatory surgery and that 24-h postoperative symptoms were a predictor of satisfaction with anesthesia., Methods: The authors prospectively studied 5,228 consecutive patients having surgery in the ambulatory setting during a 1-yr period. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were gathered and patient satisfaction was assessed using a postoperative telephone questionnaire administered 24 h after operation in 2,730 respondents. Significant univariate variables and clinically important variables were entered into multiple logistic regression models. Qualitative data on dissatisfaction were obtained by asking patients' reasons for dissatisfaction., Results: Sixty-eight of the 2,730 respondents (2.5%) had global dissatisfaction with ambulatory surgery. Nine of these patients were dissatisfied with anesthesia. Dissatisfaction with anesthesia was associated with a 12-fold increase in global dissatisfaction (P = 0.0001). Thirty-one of the 2,730 respondents (1.1%) were dissatisfied with anesthesia. An increasing number of symptoms occurring 24 h after operation was associated with an exp(0.28 x N)-fold increase in dissatisfaction with anesthesia for N number of symptoms (P = 0.0001). Qualitative data showed that the most common reason for global dissatisfaction with ambulatory surgery was personal preference for inpatient care (26%), whereas intraoperative and postoperative adverse outcomes were the major causes of dissatisfaction with anesthesia (88%)., Conclusions: Dissatisfaction with anesthesia is a predictor of global dissatisfaction with ambulatory surgery. An increasing number of symptoms 24 h after operation is a predictor of dissatisfaction with anesthesia. The rate of global dissatisfaction and anesthesia dissatisfaction is very low. The predictors from this model need to be validated by a second data set from either this or another center. Given the low rate of dissatisfaction, a focused study testing specific interventions to improve patient satisfaction would be difficult.

Background: This study was designed to define the appropriate dose of remifentanil hydrochloride alone or combined with midazolam to provide satisfactory comfort and maintain adequate respiration for a monitored anesthesia care setting., Methods: One hundred fifty-nine patients scheduled for outpatient surgery participated in this multicenter, double-blind study. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two groups: remifentanil, 1 microgram/kg, given over 30 s followed by a continuous infusion of 0.1 microgram.kg-1.min-1 (remifentanil), remifentanil, 0.5 microgram/kg, given over 30 s followed by a continuous infusion of 0.05 microgram.kg-1.min-1 (remifentanil+midazolam). Five minutes after the start of the infusion, patients received a loading dose of saline placebo (remifentanil) or midazolam, 1 mg, (remifentanil+midazolam). If patients were not oversedated, a second dose of placebo or midazolam, 1 mg, was given. Remifentanil was titrated (in increments of 50% from the initial rate) to limit patient discomfort or pain intraoperatively, and the infusion was terminated at the completion of skin closure., Results: At the time of the local anesthetic, most patients in the remifentanil and remifentanil+midazolam groups experienced no pain (66% and 60%, respectively) and no discomfort (66% and 65%, respectively). The final mean (+/-SD) remifentanil infusion rates were 0.12 +/- 0.05 microgram.kg-1.min-1 (remifentanil) and 0.07 +/- 0.03 microgram.kg-1.min-1 (remifentanil+midazolam). Fewer patients in the remifentanil+midazolam group experienced nauses compared with the remifentanil group (16% vs. 36%, respectively; P < 0.05). Four patients (5%) in the remifentanil group and two patients (2%) in the remifentanil+midazolam group experienced brief periods of oxygen desaturation (SpO2 < 90%) and hypoventilation (< 8 breaths/ min)., Conclusions: Remifentanil alone or combined with midazolam provided adequate analgesia and maintained adequate respiration at the doses reported. The low dose of remifentanil combined with 2 mg midazolam, compared with remifentanil alone, resulted in fewer side effects, slightly greater sedation, and less anxiety.

Study Objective: To evaluate the validity and reliability of an objective scoring system, the Post-Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADSS), which was compared against existing Clinical Discharge Criteria in the ambulatory surgery unit of our hospital., Design: randomized, open study., Setting: Ambulatory surgery unit at a university teaching hospital., Patients: 247 ambulatory surgery patients undergoing general anesthesia., Interventions: One hour after the operation, the initial assessment using PADSS and the Clinical Discharge Criteria was made by an independent observer. Evaluations were repeated at 30-minute intervals until patients obtained a Post-Anesthetic Discharge Score of at least 9 and fulfilled the Clinical Discharge Criteria., Measurements and Main Results: There was a close correlation between the end of anesthesia to time patients were fit for discharge using either PADSS or the Clinical Discharge Criteria (Pearson's Correlation Coefficient r = 0.89). The internal consistency reliability of PADSS (alpha = 0.65) was superior to that of the Clinical Discharge Criteria (alpha = 0.14)., Conclusions: We have found PADSS to have superior measurement scaling and diagnostic properties.

Hospitalization arouses anxiety among patients admitted for day bed surgery. The effect of the anesthetist's routine preoperative interview on the anxiety levels of 63 unpremedicated women scheduled for elective outpatient therapeutic abortions was examined using the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. The anesthetist's preoperative interviews were performed at the following times: Group 1, in the outpatient clinic one week before surgery; group 2, in the day bed unit at the time of admission to hospital; group 3, outside the operating room immediately prior to surgery. State anxiety was measured before and after patients were seen by the anesthetists. In group 1, and in groups 1 and 2, it was readministered outside the operating room immediately before surgery. Baseline anxiety Trait and State scores were not significantly different in the 3 groups (Trait: group 1, 43.3 +/- 2.2; group 2, 36.9 +/- 2.3; group 3, 38.8 +/- 2.2. State: group 1, 50.6 +/- 3.5; group 2, 43.0 +/- 2.4; group 3, 49.0 +/- 3.0). Only in group 3 did the anesthetist's interview significantly reduce patient's anxiety (before visit 49.1 +/- 3.0; after visit 46.0 +/- 2.8; P less than 0.05). A small but statistically significant reduction in State anxiety scores is achieved when patients are seen by the anesthetist immediately prior to surgery.

The sleep apnoea syndrome is reviewed, defined, and classified. Particular emphasis is placed on the identification of a patient population that is prone to sleep apnoea and the diseases and syndromes that are associated with it. For anaesthetists, direct enquiry into daytime and nighttime sleep abnormalities and careful examination of the upper airway are important for preoperative detection of these patients and especially patients with obstructive sleep apnoea who might present for anaesthesia and operation. A typical case is reported and details of the preoperative, peroperative and postoperative management are discussed.

Background: Anaesthesia comprising remifentanil plus isoflurane, enflurane or propofol was randomly evaluated in 285, 285 and 284 patients, respectively, undergoing short-procedure surgery. Methods: Anaesthesia was induced with propofol (0.5 mg · kg-1 and 10 mg · 10 s-1), and a remifentanil bolus (1 μg · kg-1) and infusion at 0.5 μg · g-1 · min-1. Five minutes after intubation, remifentanil infusion was halved and 0.5 MAC of isoflurane or enflurane, or propofol at 100 μg · kg-1 · min-1 were started and titrated for maintenance. Results: Patient demography and anaesthesia duration were similar between the groups. Surgery was performed as daycases (52%) or inpatients (48%). The median times (5–7 min) to extubation and postoperative recovery were similar between the groups. Responses to tracheal intubation (15% vs 8%) and skin incision (13% vs 7%) were significantly greater in the total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) group (P<0.05). Fewer patients given remifentanil and isoflurane (21%) or enflurane (19%) experienced ≥1 intraoperative stress response compared to the TIVA group (28%) (P<0.05). Median times to qualification for and actual recovery room discharge were 0.5–0.6 h and 1.1–1.2 h, respectively. The most common remifentanil-related symptoms were muscle rigidity (6–7%) at induction, hypotension (3–5%) and bradycardia (1–4%) intraoperatively and, shivering (6–7%), nausea and vomiting postoperatively. Nausea (7%) and vomiting (3%) were significantly lower with TIVA compared with inhaled anaesthetic groups (14–15% and 6–8%, respectively; P<0.05). Conclusion: Anaesthesia combining remifentanil with volatile hypnotics or TIVA with propofol was effective and well tolerated. Times of extubation, postanaesthesia recovery and recovery room discharge were rapid, consistent and similar for all three regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia / Journal Canadien d'Anesthésie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

SummaryAmbulatory surgery is growing worldwide. The challenge of providing anaesthesia for longer and more complex surgery in sicker and elderly patients is a reality. To maintain the safety and good outcomes of ambulatory anaesthesia, high-risk patients will need to be evaluated carefully. Anaesthetic techniques that use short-acting drugs and minimize postoperative morbidity and mortality should become the focus. Policies on management of postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, voiding and discharge from hospital will maintain good outcome measures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) affects ∼9–24% of the general population, and 90% remain undiagnosed. Those patients with undiagnosed moderate-to-severe OSA may be associated with an increased risk of perioperative complications. Our objective was to evaluate the proportion of surgical patients with undiagnosed moderate-to-severe OSA. Methods After research ethics board approval, patients visiting preoperative clinics were recruited over 4 yr and screened with the STOP-BANG questionnaire. The 1085 patients, who consented, subsequently underwent polysomnography (PSG) (laboratory or portable) before operation. Chart review was conducted in this historical cohort to ascertain the clinical diagnosis of OSA by surgeons and anaesthetists, blinded to the PSG results. The PSG study-identified OSA patients were further classified based on severity using the apnoea–hypopnoea index (AHI) cut-offs. Results Of 819 patients, 111 patients had pre-existing OSA and 58% (64/111) were not diagnosed by the surgeons and 15% (17/111) were not diagnosed by the anaesthetists. Among the 708 study patients, PSG showed that 233 (31%) had no OSA, 218 (31%) patients had mild OSA (AHI: 5–15); 148 (21%) had moderate OSA (AHI: 15–30), and 119 (17%) had severe OSA (AHI>30). Before operation, of the 267 patients with moderate-to-severe OSA, 92% (n=245) and 60% (n=159) were not diagnosed by the surgeons and the anaesthetists, respectively. Conclusions We found that anaesthetists and surgeons failed to identify a significant number of patients with pre-existing OSA and symptomatic undiagnosed OSA, before operation. This study may provide an impetus for more diligent case finding of OSA before operation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]