Quality and Impact of Survey Research Among Anesthesiologists: A Systematic Review

New technology has facilitated survey research of anesthesia professional society members. We evaluated prevailing metrics of quality and impact of published research studies based on surveys of anesthesiologists. We hypothesized that adherence to recommended practices (such as use of reminders) would be associated with increased survey response rates, and that higher response rates would be associated with higher article impact. Using the MEDLINE database, we identified 45 English-language research articles published in 2010-2017 reporting original data from surveys of anesthesiologists. The median response rate was 37% (IQR: 25-46%). Recommended survey practices, including the use of reminders (p = 0.861) and validated questionnaires (p = 0.719), were not correlated with response rates. In turn, survey response rates were not associated with measures of article impact (p = 0.528). The impact of published research based on surveys of anesthesiologists, as measured by citation scores (p = 0.493) and Altmetrics (p = 0.826), may be driven primarily by the novel data or questions raised using survey methodology, but does not appear to be associated with response rates. Improving reporting of survey methodology and understanding possible sources of non-response bias are important for future studies in this area.

The difficult airway with recommendations for management--part 2--the anticipated difficult airway

BACKGROUND

Appropriate planning is crucial to avoid morbidity and mortality when difficulty is anticipated with airway management. Many guidelines developed by national societies have focused on management of difficulty encountered in the unconscious patient; however, little guidance appears in the literature on how best to approach the patient with an anticipated difficult airway.

METHODS

To review this and other subjects, the Canadian Airway Focus Group (CAFG) was re-formed. With representation from anesthesiology, emergency medicine, and critical care, CAFG members were assigned topics for review. As literature reviews were completed, results were presented and discussed during teleconferences and two face-to-face meetings. When appropriate, evidence- or consensus-based recommendations were made, and levels of evidence were assigned.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

Previously published predictors of difficult direct laryngoscopy are widely known. More recent studies report predictors of difficult face mask ventilation, video laryngoscopy, use of a supraglottic device, and cricothyrotomy. All are important facets of a complete airway evaluation and must be considered when difficulty is anticipated with airway management. Many studies now document the increasing patient morbidity that occurs with multiple attempts at tracheal intubation. Therefore, when difficulty is anticipated, tracheal intubation after induction of general anesthesia should be considered only when success with the chosen device(s) can be predicted in a maximum of three attempts. Concomitant predicted difficulty using oxygenation by face mask or supraglottic device ventilation as a fallback makes an awake approach advisable. Contextual issues, such as patient cooperation, availability of additional skilled help, and the clinician's experience, must also be considered in deciding the appropriate strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

With an appropriate airway evaluation and consideration of relevant contextual issues, a rational decision can be made on whether an awake approach to tracheal intubation will maximize patient safety or if airway management can safely proceed after induction of general anesthesia. With predicted difficulty, close attention should be paid to details of implementing the chosen approach. This should include having a plan in case of the failure of tracheal intubation or patient oxygenation.

The disposable Ambu aScope vs. a conventional flexible videoscope for awake intubation -- a randomised study

BACKGROUND

A new disposable flexible videoscope, the Ambu® aScope, has several potential advantages compared with reusable devices, but it is a prerequisite for its widespread use that it functions sufficiently well in the management of patients in whom difficulty with airway management is anticipated and awake intubation is indicated.

METHODS

In a pilot study, 20 patients with normal airways were intubated with the aScope. Subsequently, 40 patients with predicted difficult tracheal intubation were randomly assigned to be intubated awake with either the aScope or the reusable Olympus BF videobronchoscope.

RESULTS

All patients were successfully intubated awake. The median total intubation time, including the administration of local anaesthesia, was 278 vs. 234 s in the aScope and Olympus groups, respectively (P = 0.03). In two cases in the aScope group, the image became blurred immediately after the first injection of lidocaine via the injection channel, and the time that it took to replace the scopes was included in the intubation times.

CONCLUSION

Both the disposable aScope and the reusable Olympus videoscope allowed safe awake intubation in our elective patients with severely difficult, but uncompromised, airways. The occasional need to employ a spare scope because of malfunctioning would make the disposable aScope less suitable in patients with acutely compromised airways.