Search

Background Communication amongst team members is critical to providing safe, effective medical care. We investigated the role of communication failures in patient injury using the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database. Methods Claims associated with surgical/procedural and obstetric anaesthesia and postoperative pain management for adverse events from 2004 or later were included. Communication was defined as transfer of information between two or more parties. Failure was defined as communication that was incomplete, inaccurate, absent, or not timely. We classified root causes of failures as content, audience, purpose, or occasion with inter-rater reliability assessed by kappa. Claims with communication failures contributing to injury (injury-related communication failures; n=389) were compared with claims without any communication failures (n=521) using Fisher's exact test, t-test, or Mann–Whitney U-tests. Results At least one communication failure contributing to patient injury occurred in 43% (n=389) out of 910 claims (κ=0.885). Patients in claims with injury-related communication failures were similar to patients in claims without failures, except that failures were more common in outpatient settings (34% vs 26%; P=0.004). Fifty-two claims had multiple communication failures for a total of 446 injury-related failures, and 47% of failures occurred during surgery, 28% preoperatively, and 23% postoperatively. Content failures (insufficient, inaccurate, or no information transmitted) accounted for 60% of the 446 communication failures. Conclusions Communication failure contributed to patient injury in 43% of anaesthesia malpractice claims. Patient/case characteristics in claims with communication failures were similar to those without failures, except that failures were more common in outpatient settings.

Background Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients are at increased risk for pulmonary and cardiovascular complications; perioperative mortality risk is unclear. This report analyzes cases submitted to the OSA Death and Near Miss Registry, focusing on factors associated with poor outcomes after an OSA-related event. We hypothesized that more severe outcomes would be associated with OSA severity, less intense monitoring, and higher cumulative opioid doses. Methods Inclusion criteria were age ≥18 years, OSA diagnosed or suspected, event related to OSA, and event occurrence 1992 or later and Results Sixty-six cases met inclusion criteria with known OSA diagnosed in 55 (83%). Patients were middle aged (mean = 53, standard deviation [SD] = 15 years), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) III (59%, n = 38), and obese (mean body mass index [BMI] = 38, SD = 9 kg/m); most had inpatient (80%, n = 51) and elective (90%, n = 56) procedures with general anesthesia (88%, n = 58). Most events occurred on the ward (56%, n = 37), and 14 (21%) occurred at home. Most events (76%, n = 50) occurred within 24 hours of anesthesia end. Ninety-seven percent (n = 64) received opioids within the 24 hours before the event, and two-thirds (41 of 62) also received sedatives. Positive airway pressure devices and/or supplemental oxygen were in use at the time of critical events in 7.5% and 52% of cases, respectively. Sixty-five percent (n = 43) of patients died or had brain damage; 35% (n = 23) experienced other critical events. Continuous central respiratory monitoring was in use for 3 of 43 (7%) of cases where death or brain damage resulted. Death or brain damage was (1) less common when the event was witnessed than unwitnessed (OR = 0.036; 95% CI, 0.007-0.181; P Conclusions Death and brain damage were more likely to occur with unwitnessed events, no supplemental oxygen, lack of respiratory monitoring, and coadministration of opioids and sedatives. It is important that efforts be directed at providing more effective monitoring for OSA patients following surgery, and clinicians consider the potentially dangerous effects of opioids and sedatives-especially when combined-when managing OSA patients postoperatively.

Editor’s PerspectiveWhat We Already Know about This TopicWhat This Article Tells Us That Is NewBackgroundDifficult or failed intubation is a major contributor to morbidity for patients and liability for anesthesiologists. Updated difficult airway management guidelines and incorporation of new airway devices into practice may have affected patient outcomes. The authors therefore compared recent malpractice claims related to difficult tracheal intubation to older claims using the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database.MethodsClaims with difficult tracheal intubation as the primary damaging event occurring in the years 2000 to 2012 (n = 102) were compared to difficult tracheal intubation claims from 1993 to 1999 (n = 93). Difficult intubation claims from 2000 to 2012 were evaluated for preoperative predictors and appropriateness of airway management.ResultsPatients in 2000 to 2012 difficult intubation claims were sicker (78% American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] Physical Status III to V; n = 78 of 102) and had more emergency procedures (37%; n = 37 of 102) compared to patients in 1993 to 1999 claims (47% ASA Physical Status III to V; n = 36 of 93; P < 0.001 and 22% emergency; n = 19 of 93; P = 0.025). More difficult tracheal intubation events occurred in nonperioperative locations in 2000 to 2012 than 1993 to 1999 (23%; n = 23 of 102 vs. 10%; n = 10 of 93; P = 0.035). Outcomes differed between time periods (P < 0.001), with a higher proportion of death in 2000 to 2012 claims (73%; n = 74 of 102 vs. 42%; n = 39 of 93 in 1993 to 1999 claims; P < 0.001 adjusted for multiple testing). In 2000 to 2012 claims, preoperative predictors of difficult tracheal intubation were present in 76% (78 of 102). In the 97 claims with sufficient information for assessment, inappropriate airway management occurred in 73% (71 of 97; κ = 0.44 to 0.66). A “can’t intubate, can’t oxygenate” emergency occurred in 80 claims with delayed surgical airway in more than one third (39%; n = 31 of 80).ConclusionsOutcomes remained poor in recent malpractice claims related to difficult tracheal intubation. Inadequate airway planning and judgment errors were contributors to patient harm. Our results emphasize the need to improve both practitioner skills and systems response when difficult or failed tracheal intubation is encountered.

Background Situational awareness errors may play an important role in the genesis of patient harm. The authors examined closed anesthesia malpractice claims for death or brain damage to determine the frequency and type of situational awareness errors. Methods Surgical and procedural anesthesia death and brain damage claims in the Anesthesia Closed Claims Project database were analyzed. Situational awareness error was defined as failure to perceive relevant clinical information, failure to comprehend the meaning of available information, or failure to project, anticipate, or plan. Patient and case characteristics, primary damaging events, and anesthesia payments in claims with situational awareness errors were compared to other death and brain damage claims from 2002 to 2013. Results Anesthesiologist situational awareness errors contributed to death or brain damage in 198 of 266 claims (74%). Respiratory system damaging events were more common in claims with situational awareness errors (56%) than other claims (21%, P < 0.001). The most common specific respiratory events in error claims were inadequate oxygenation or ventilation (24%), difficult intubation (11%), and aspiration (10%). Payments were made in 85% of situational awareness error claims compared to 46% in other claims (P = 0.001), with no significant difference in payment size. Among 198 claims with anesthesia situational awareness error, perception errors were most common (42%), whereas comprehension errors (29%) and projection errors (29%) were relatively less common. Conclusions Situational awareness error definitions were operationalized for reliable application to real-world anesthesia cases. Situational awareness errors may have contributed to catastrophic outcomes in three quarters of recent anesthesia malpractice claims.

Background Awareness during general anaesthesia is a source of concern for patients and anaesthetists, with potential for psychological and medicolegal sequelae. We used a registry to evaluate unintended awareness from the patient's perspective with an emphasis on their experiences and healthcare provider responses. Methods English-speaking subjects self-reported explicit recall of events during anaesthesia to the Anesthesia Awareness Registry of the ASA, completed a survey, and submitted copies of medical records. Anaesthesia awareness was defined as explicit recall of events during induction or maintenance of general anaesthesia. Patient experiences, satisfaction, and desired practitioner responses to explicit recall were based on survey responses. Results Most of the 68 respondents meeting inclusion criteria (75%) were dissatisfied with the manner in which their concerns were addressed by their healthcare providers, and many reported long-term harm. Half (51%) of respondents reported that neither the anaesthesia provider nor surgeon expressed concern about their experience. Few were offered an apology (10%) or referral for counseling (15%). Patient preferences for responses after an awareness episode included validation of their experience (37%), an explanation (28%), and discussion or follow-up to the episode (26%). Conclusions Data from this registry confirm the serious impact of anaesthesia awareness for some patients, and suggest that patients need more systematic responses and follow-up by healthcare providers.

Factors associated with the well-being of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, and questioning (LGBTQ) youth were qualitatively examined to better understand how these factors are experienced from the youths’ perspectives. Largely recruited from LGBTQ youth groups, 68 youth participated in focus groups ( n = 63) or individual interviews ( n = 5). The sample included 50% male, 47% female, and 3% transgender participants. Researchers used a consensual methods approach to identify negative and positive factors across 8 domains. Negative factors were associated with families, schools, religious institutions, and community or neighborhood; positive factors were associated with the youth’s own identity development, peer networks, and involvement in the LGBTQ community. These findings suggest a pervasiveness of negative experiences in multiple contexts, and the importance of fostering a positive LGBTQ identity and supportive peer/community networks. Efforts should work towards reducing and eliminating the prejudicial sentiments often present in the institutions and situations that LGBTQ youth encounter.

This toolkit is designed for use by attending physicians to teach residents, fellows, medical students, and other healthcare providers and staff how to effectively apply core elements of shared decision-making in clinical encounters with patients regardless of practice setting. Shared decision-making is a two-way strategy to empower the patient to actively make an evidence-based treatment choice with the physician. Incorporating both medical and personal criteria into decisions allows for the deliberation of decisions to include all relevant parties. The toolkit includes self-study materials for trainers, tools for in-situ clinical training for providers, and references for additional resources. Field testing of this training included observation of five providers in the clinic with a total of 16 patients. Observation during training revealed that the most common shared decision-making elements absent from clinical encounters were input from trusted others, patient role, teach back, eliciting preferences, and presenting uncertainties.

Objectives. We investigated the association of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) with sexual orientation among lesbians and bisexual women and compared the predictors of HRQOL between the 2 groups. Methods. We used multivariate logistic regression to analyze Washington State Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System population-based data (2003 to 2007) in a sample of 1496 lesbians and bisexual women and examined determinants of HRQOL among lesbians and bisexual women. Results. For lesbians and bisexual women, frequent mental distress and poor general health were associated with poverty and lack of exercise; poor general health was associated with obesity and mental distress. Bisexual women showed a higher likelihood of frequent mental distress and poor general health than did lesbians. The odds of mental distress were higher for bisexual women living in urban areas as compared with nonurban areas. Lesbians had an elevated risk of poor general health and mental distress during midlife. Conclusions. Despite the standard practice of collapsing sexual minority women into a single group, lesbian and bisexual women in this study emerge as distinct groups that merit specific attention. Bisexual women are at elevated risk for poor HRQOL.

With the exception of HIV care, informal caregiving of chronically ill lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) adults has received very limited attention in the extensive caregiving literature. This article reports on research that considered the social context of care and a dyadic caregiving approach for 36 chronically ill LGB adults ages 50 and older and their informal caregivers. In this study, both discrimination and relationship quality were associated with depression among chronically ill LGB adults and their caregivers. Furthermore, preliminary findings suggested that relationship quality moderates the impact of discrimination as a risk factor for depression in chronically ill LGB adults. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for social policy and future research. Given the changing demographics in the United States with the aging of the baby boomers, as well as an increase in chronic illness, fostering better understanding of caregiving across diverse sexualities and families is critical.