The future of nonoperating room anesthesia in the 21st century: emphasis on quality and safety

Patient selection for nonoperating room anesthesia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Given the rapid growth of nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) in recent years, it is essential to review its unique challenges as well as strategies for patient selection and care optimization.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent investigations have uncovered an increasing prevalence of older and higher ASA physical status patients in NORA settings. Although closed claim data regarding patient injury demonstrate a lower proportion of NORA cases resulting in a claim than traditional operating room cases, NORA cases have an increased risk of claim for death. Challenges within NORA include site-specific differences, limitations in ergonomic design, and increased stress among anesthesia providers. Several authors have thus proposed strategies focusing on standardizing processes, site-specific protocols, and ergonomic improvements to mitigate risks.

SUMMARY

Considering the unique challenges of NORA settings, meticulous patient selection, risk stratification, and preoperative optimization are crucial. Embracing data-driven strategies and leveraging technological innovations (such as artificial intelligence) is imperative to refine quality control methods in targeted areas. Collaborative efforts led by anesthesia providers will ensure personalized, well tolerated, and improved patient outcomes across all phases of NORA care.

Incidence of complications after nonoperating room anesthesia in children in a low- and middle-income country: A prospective and observational study

INTRODUCTION

Nonoperating room anesthesia is a growing field of medicine that can have an increased risk of complications, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.

AIMS

The aim of this study was to describe the incidence of complications after pediatric nonoperating room anesthesia and investigate its risk factors.

METHODS

In this prospective observational study, we included all children aged less than 5 years who were sedated or anesthetized in the radiology setting of a university hospital in a low- and middle-income country. Patients were divided into two groups: complications or no-complications groups. Then, we compared both groups, and univariable and multivariable logistic regression models were used to investigate the main risk factors for complications.

RESULTS

We included 256 children, and the incidence of complications was 8.6%. The main predictors of nonoperating room anesthesia-related morbidity were: critically-ill children (aOR = 2.490; 95% CI: 1.55-11.21), predicted difficult airway (aOR = 5.704; 95% CI: 1.017-31.98), and organization insufficiencies (aOR = 52.6; 95% CI:4.55-613). The preanesthetic consultation few days before NORA protected against complications (aOR = 0.263; 95%CI: 0.080-0.867).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of complications during NORA among children in our radiology setting remains high. Investigating predictors for morbidity allowed high-risk patient selection, which allowed taking precautions. Several improvement measures were taken to address the organization's insufficiencies.

Anaesthesia clinicians' perception of safety, workload, anxiety, and stress in a remote hybrid suite compared with the operating room

BACKGROUND

Anaesthesia care outside of the standard operating room (OR) can be challenging. This prospective matched case-pair study describes the difference in anaesthesia clinicians' perception of safety, workload, anxiety, and stress in two settings by comparing similar neurosurgical procedures performed in either the OR or a remote hybrid room with intraoperative MRI (MRI-OR).

METHODS

A visual numeric scale for safety perception and validated instruments for workload, anxiety, and stress were administered to enrolled anaesthesia clinicians after induction of anaesthesia and at the end of eligible cases. The difference in outcomes reported by the same clinician for unique pairs of similar operations performed in both settings (OR vs MRI-OR) was compared using the Student t-test with the general bootstrap algorithm to address the presence of clusters.

RESULTS

Over 15 months, 37 clinicians provided data for 53 case pairs. Working in the remote MRI-OR vs OR was associated with lower perceived safety (7.3 [2.0] vs 8.8 [0.9]; P<0.001), higher scores in the workload subdomains effort and frustration (41.6 [24.1] vs 31.3 [21.6]; P=0.006 and 32.4 [22.9] vs 20.7 [17.2]; P=0.002, respectively), and higher anxiety (33.6 [10.1] vs 28.4 [9.2]; P=0.003) at the end of the case. Stress was rated higher in the MRI-OR after induction of anaesthesia (26.5 [15.5] vs 20.9 [13.4]; P=0.006). Effect sizes (Cohen's D) were moderate to good.

CONCLUSIONS

Anaesthesia clinicians reported lower perceived safety and higher workload, anxiety, and stress in a remote MRI-OR compared with a standard OR. Improving non-standard work settings should benefit clinician well-being and patient safety.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

.

Operating Room Performance Optimization Metrics: a Systematic Review

Literature proposes numerous initiatives for optimization of the Operating Room (OR). Despite multiple suggested strategies for the optimization of workflow on the OR, its patients and (medical) staff, no uniform description of 'optimization' has been adopted. This makes it difficult to evaluate the proposed optimization strategies. In particular, the metrics used to quantify OR performance are diverse so that assessing the impact of suggested approaches is complex or even impossible. To secure a higher implementation success rate of optimisation strategies in practice we believe OR optimisation and its quantification should be further investigated. We aim to provide an inventory of the metrics and methods used to optimise the OR by the means of a structured literature study. We observe that several aspects of OR performance are unaddressed in literature, and no studies account for possible interactions between metrics of quality and efficiency. We conclude that a systems approach is needed to align metrics across different elements of OR performance, and that the wellbeing of healthcare professionals is underrepresented in current optimisation approaches.

Systems safety in nonoperating room anesthesia locations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) care is an area of rapid growth over the last decade. However, literature describing safety systems in NORA is limited. This review evaluates historical safety models described by Donabedian and Reason, assesses the NORA environment and safety concerns that may contribute to adverse events, and provides potential solutions via a human-centered systems safety design.

RECENT FINDINGS

Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) 3.0 provides a framework for quality and patient safety improvement. Although the previous SEIPS 2.0 model has been used to evaluate NORA environments with focus on the case volume, high productivity pressure, and significant physical constraints common to NORA sites, literature describing SEIPS 3.0 in relation to NORA care is sparse. Given the rate of malpractice claims for death in NORA settings, solutions that address the multifactorial nature of adverse events are needed.

SUMMARY

The SEIPS 3.0 model may be applied to NORA care. Changes should focus on staffing ratios, staff/patient education, checklist utilization, burnout prevention, scheduling efficiency, anesthesia workstation standardization, communication improvements, room layout, medication and supply availability and storage, and the global managerial approach. Team members must demonstrate flexibility and a willingness to adapt to successfully implement change.

Frameworks for value-based care in the nonoperating room setting

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) presents a unique opportunity for the application of value-based care (VBC) principles to procedures performed in the office-based and nonoperating room inpatient settings. The purpose of this article is to review how value is defined in NORA and enabling principles by which anesthesiologists can maximize value in NORA.

RECENT FINDINGS

In order to drive value, NORA providers can target improvements in clinical outcomes where NORA lags behind operating room-based anesthesia (death, over-sedation, nerve injury), implement protocols focusing on intermediate outcomes/quality (postoperative nausea and vomiting, pain control, hypothermia, delirium), incorporate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to assess the trajectory of a patient's perioperative care, and reduce costs (direct and indirect) through operational and supply-based efficiencies. Establishing a culture of patient and provider safety first, appropriate patient selection with targeted, perioperative optimization of comorbidities, and efficient deployment of staff, space, and resources are critical enablers for success.

SUMMARY

Value in NORA can be defined as clinical outcomes, quality, patient-reported outcomes, and efficiency divided by the direct and indirect costs for achieving those outcomes. We present a novel framework adapting current VBC practices in operating room anesthesia to the NORA environment.

Morbidity, mortality, and systems safety in non-operating room anaesthesia: a narrative review

Non-operating room anaesthesia (NORA) describes anaesthesia delivered outside a traditional operating room (OR) setting. Non-operating room anaesthesia cases have increased significantly in the last 20 yr and are projected to account for half of all anaesthetics delivered in the next decade. In contrast to most other medication administration contexts, NORA is performed in high-volume fast-paced environments not optimised for anaesthesia care. These predisposing factors combined with increasing case volume, less provider experience, and higher-acuity patients increase the potential for preventable adverse events. Our narrative review examines morbidity and mortality in NORA settings compared with the OR and the systems factors impacting safety in NORA. A review of the literature from January 1, 1994 to March 5, 2021 was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, and ProQuest. After completing abstract screening and full-text review, 30 articles were selected for inclusion. These articles suggested higher rates of morbidity and mortality in NORA cases compared with OR cases. This included a higher proportion of death claims and complications attributable to inadequate oxygenation, and a higher likelihood that adverse events are preventable. Despite relatively few attempts to quantify safety concerns, it was possible to find a range of systems safety concerns repeated across multiple studies, including insufficient lighting, noise, cramped workspace, and restricted access to patients. Old and unfamiliar equipment, lack of team familiarity, and limited preoperative evaluation are also commonly noted challenges. Applying a systems view of safety, it is possible to suggest a range of methods to improve NORA safety and performance.

Patient monitoring in the nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) setting: current advances in technology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) procedures continue to increase in type and complexity as procedural medicine makes technical advances. Patients presenting for NORA procedures are also older and sicker than ever. Commensurate with the requirements of procedural medicine, anesthetic monitoring must meet the American Society of Anesthesiologists standards for basic monitoring.

RECENT FINDINGS

There have been improvements in the required monitors that are used for intraoperative patient care. Some of these changes have been with new technologies and others have occurred with software refinements. In addition, specialized monitoring devises have also been introduced into NORA locations (depth of hypnosis, respiratory monitoring, point-of care ultrasound). These additions to the monitoring tools available to the anesthesiologist working in the NORA-environment push the boundaries of procedures which may be accomplished in this setting.

SUMMARY

NORA procedures constitute a growing percentage of total administered anesthetics. There is no difference in the monitoring standard between that of an anesthetic administered in an operating room and a NORA location. Anesthesiologists in the NORA setting must have the same compendium of monitors available as do their colleagues working in the operating suite.

Frameworks for trainee education in the nonoperating room setting

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

As the volume and types of procedures requiring anesthesiologist involvement in the nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) setting continue to grow, it is important to create a formal curriculum and clearly define educational goals.

RECENT FINDINGS

A NORA rotation should be accompanied by a dedicated curriculum that should include topics such as education objectives, information about different interventional procedures, anesthesia techniques and equipment, and safety principles. NORA environment may be unfamiliar to anesthesia residents. The trainees must also learn the principles of efficiency, rapid recovery from anesthesia, and timely room turnover. Resident education in NORA should be an essential component of their training. The goals and objectives of the NORA educational experience should include not only developing the clinical knowledge necessary to implement the specific type of anesthetic desired for each procedure, but also the practical knowledge of care coordination needed to safely and efficiently work in the NORA setting.

SUMMARY

As educators, we must foster and grow a resident's resilience by continually challenging them with new clinical scenarios and giving them appropriate autonomy to take risks and move outside of their comfort zone. Residents should understand that exposure to such unique and demanding environment can be transformative.

Efficiency Improvements of Nonoperating Room Cardiac Anesthesia Services

OBJECTIVE

Scheduling and staffing nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) cases often require cross-service coordination and can result in significant delays in patient care, resource inefficiencies, and provider dissatisfaction. The objective of the present study was to reduce these delays and case cancellations for patients requiring cardiac anesthesia for their transesophageal echocardiography procedure.

DESIGN

Preintervention and postintervention analysis of prospectively collected observational data.

SETTING

Single institution, quaternary care hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients requiring cardiac anesthesia for transesophageal echocardiography.

INTERVENTIONS

The study included the following three interventions: outpatient transesophageal echocardiography order screening, identifying the daily NORA cardiac anesthesia attending, and centralizing the scheduling process among all cardiac NORA locations.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Before the interventions, the average delay time for echocardiography laboratory cases was 34.9 minutes (n = 38, standard deviation 30.6). In the two months after the aforementioned interventions were performed, the average delay time was 20.2 minutes (n = 50, standard deviation 10.0), representing a decrease in the wait time of 42%. In the preintervention period, two cases had delays of 60 minutes or more; in the postintervention group, there were zero cases with delays of 60 minutes or more. During the postintervention period, zero cases were rescheduled or cancelled because of lack of availability or scheduling conflicts by the cardiac anesthesia team as opposed to three cases that were rescheduled or cancelled in the preintervention period.

CONCLUSION

In the two months after implementing changes to the scheduling process for NORA cases in the echocardiography laboratory, a substantial reduction in average case delay, elimination of long delays lasting more than one hour, and avoidance of case cancellations were observed.

Con: The Length of Adult Cardiothoracic Anesthesiology Fellowship Training Should Not Be Extended Beyond One Year

Fellowship training in adult cardiothoracic anesthesiology (ACTA) is a one-year postgraduate experience with formal accreditation by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education. ACTA is a competitive and evolving subspeciality. With expanding knowledge, clinical roles and technical skills required of the modern cardiothoracic anesthesiologists, the optimal structure and duration of the fellowship training are worth considering. This manuscript provides supporting rationale for fellowship training in ACTA to remain one year in duration. The expanding responsibilities of the cardiothoracic anesthesiologist and strategies to best train the future of the subspecialty within the current training structure are discussed. It also briefly examines the history and current status of the fellowship training, reviews considerations for increasing fellowship duration, and highlights personal and financial considerations during the training.

Nonoperating room anaesthesia: safety, monitoring, cognitive aids and severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2

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.

Nonoperating room anesthesia in different parts of the world

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.

Pediatric Anesthesia Outside the Operating Room: Safety and Systems

Anesthesia care performed outside the operating room is a growing area of pediatric anesthesia practice. The anesthesiology team expects to care for children in diverse locations, which include diagnostic and interventional radiology, gastroenterology and pulmonary endoscopy suites, radiation oncology sites, and the cardiac catheterization laboratory. To provide safe, high-quality care the anesthesiologist working in these environments must understand the unique environmental, logistical, and perioperative considerations and risks involved with each remote location. This 2-part review provides an overview of safety and system considerations in pediatric nonoperating room anesthesia before describing in more detail considerations for particular remote anesthetizing locations.

Practice horizons in pediatric nonoperating room anesthesia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anesthesia outside the operating room is rapidly expanding for adult and pediatric patients. Anesthesia clinicians practicing in this area need a good understanding of the challenges of the NORA environment and the anesthetic risks and perioperative implications of practice so that they can deliver safe care to their patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent reports from large patient databases have afforded anesthesiologists a greater understanding of the risk of NORA when compared to anesthesia in the operating room. Descriptions of advances in team training with the use of simulation have allowed the development of organized procedural teams. With an emphasis on clear communication, an understanding of individual roles, and a patient-centered focus, these teams can reliably develop emergency response procedures, so that critical moments are not delayed in an environment remote from usual assistance.

SUMMARY

With appropriate attention to organizational concerns (i.e. team environment, safety protocols) and unrelenting focus on patient safety, anesthesiologists can assist in safely providing the benefit of cutting-edge technical advancements to pediatric patients in these challenging environments.

The radiation environment of anaesthesiologists in the endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography room

Anaesthesiologists are increasingly involved in nonoperating room anaesthesia (NORA) for fluoroscopic procedures. However, the radiation exposure of medical staff differs among NORA settings. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the radiation environment generated by fluoroscopic endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and the radiation exposure of anaesthesiologists. The dose area product (DAP), radiation entrance dose (RED), and fluoroscopy time (FT) according to the procedures and monthly cumulative radiation exposure were analysed at two sites (neck and wrist) from 363 procedures in 316 patients performed within 3 months. The total RED and DAP were 43643.1 mGy and 13681.1 Gy cm2, respectively. DAP and RED (r = 0.924) were strongly correlated and DAP and FT (r = 0.701) and RED and FT (r = 0.749) were moderately correlated. The radiation environment per procedure varied widely, DAP and RED per FT were the highest during stent insertion with esophagogastroduodenoscopy. Monthly cumulative deep dose equivalents at the wrist and neck ranged between 0.31-1.27 mSv and 0.33-0.59 mSv, respectively, but they were related to jaw thrust manipulation (r = 0.997, P = 0.047) and not to the radiation environment. The anaesthesiologists may be exposed to high dose of radiation in the ERCP room, which depends on the volume of procedures performed and perhaps the anaesthesiologists' practice patterns.