The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. Problems with regional anaesthesia: an analysis of 2000 incident reports

Wrong-site nerve blocks: evidence-review and prevention strategies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There has been increasing attention to wrong site medical procedures over the last 20 years. This review aims to provide a summary of the current understanding and recommendations for the prevention of wrong-site nerve blocks (WSNB).

RECENT FINDINGS

Various procedural, patient, practitioner, and organizational factors have been associated with the risk of WSNB. Recent findings have suggested that the use of a checklist is likely to reduce the incidence of WSNB. However, despite the widespread use of preprocedural checklists, WSNB continue to occur at significant frequency. This may be due to the inability of practitioners and teams to implement checklists correctly or the cognitive errors that prevent checklists from being executed as designed.

SUMMARY

Though the evidence is limited, it is recommended that a combination of multiple strategies should be employed to prevent WSNB. These include the use of preprocedural markings, well constructed checklists, time-out/stop-moments, and cognitive/physical aids. Effective implementation requires team education and engagement that empowers all team members to speak up as part of a culture of safety.

[Inadvertent epidural infusion of paracetamol]

A 45-year-old woman was accidentally administered an epidural infusion of paracetamol instead of levobupivacaine for postoperative pain therapy during the postoperative period of abdominal hysterectomy under general anesthesia combined with epidural analgesia. The patient had no neurological symptoms at any time, although a slight tendency to arterial hypotension that did not require treatment was observed. No rescue analgesia was necessary until 8h after the start of epidural infusion. The incidence of these types of errors is probably underestimated, although there are several cases reported with various drugs.

Application of an aviation model of incident reporting and investigation to the neurosurgical scenario: method and preliminary data

OBJECT

Incident reporting systems are universally recognized as important tools for quality improvement in all complex adaptive systems, including the operating room. Nevertheless, introducing a safety culture among neurosurgeons is a slow process, and few studies are available in the literature regarding the implementation of an incident reporting system within a neurosurgical department. The authors describe the institution of an aviation model of incident reporting and investigation in neurosurgery, focusing on the method they have used and presenting some preliminary results.

METHODS

In 2010, the Inpatient Safety On-Board project was developed through cooperation between a team of human factor and safety specialists with aviation backgrounds (DgSky team) and the general manager of the Fondazione Istituto Neurologico Carlo Besta. In 2011, after specific training in safety culture, the authors implemented an aviation-derived prototype of incident reporting within the Department of Neurosurgery. They then developed an experimental protocol to track, analyze, and categorize any near misses that happened in the operating room. This project officially started in January 2012, when a dedicated team of assessors was established. All members of the neurosurgical department were asked to report near misses on a voluntary, confidential, and protected form (Patient Incident Reporting System form, Besta Safety Management Programme). Reports were entered into an online database and analyzed by a dedicated team of assessors with the help of a facilitator, and an aviation-derived root cause analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Since January 2012, 14 near misses were analyzed and classified. The near-miss contributing factors were mainly related to human factors (9 of 14 cases), technology (1 of 14 cases), organizational factors (3 of 14 cases), or procedural factors (1 of 14 cases).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing an incident reporting system is quite demanding; the process should involve all of the people who work within the environment under study. Persistence and strong commitment are required to enact the culture change essential in shifting from a paradigm of infallible operators to the philosophy of errare humanum est. For this paradigm shift to be successful, contributions from aviation and human factor experts are critical.

Critical incident monitoring in anaesthesia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Updates on developments in critical incident monitoring in anaesthesia, and assesses its role in improving patient safety.

RECENT FINDINGS

Critical incident reporting has become more widely accepted as an effective way to improve anaesthetic safety, and has continued to highlight the importance of human errors and system failures. The establishment of an international database also improves critical incident reporting. Experiences from the national reporting and learning system in the UK have provided some solutions to the many problems and criticisms faced by the critical incident reporting technique. Direct observations to detect errors are more accurate than voluntary reporting of critical incidents, and may be a promising new approach.

SUMMARY

Critical incident monitoring is a valuable tool in ensuring patient safety due to its low cost and the ability to provide a comprehensive body of detailed qualitative information. The qualitative information gathered can be used to develop strategies to prevent and manage existing problems, as well as to plan further initiatives for patient safety. Novel approaches should complement existing methods to achieve better results. The development of a culture which emphasises safety should go hand in hand with current audit activities.

Safety in anaesthesia: a study of 12,606 reported incidents from the UK National Reporting and Learning System

The incident reporting database at the National Patient Safety Agency was interrogated on the nature, frequency and severity of incidents related to anaesthesia. Of 12,606 reports over a 2-year period, 2842 (22.5%) resulted in little harm or a moderate degree of harm, and 269 (2.1%) resulted in severe harm or death, with procedure or treatment problems generating the highest risk. One thousand and thirty-five incidents (8%) related to pre-operative assessment, with harm occurring in 275 (26.6%), and 552 (4.4%) related to epidural anaesthesia, with harm reported in 198 (35.9%). Fifty-eight occurrences of anaesthetic awareness were also examined. This preliminary analysis is not authoritative enough to warrant widespread changes of practice, but justifies future collaborative approaches to reduce the potential for harm and improve the submission, collection and analysis of incident reports. Practitioners, departments and professional bodies should consider how the information can be used to promote patient safety and their own defensibility.

Crisis management during regional anaesthesia

BACKGROUND

Regional anaesthesia is widely used and has been considered to pose few risks once the block is established. However, life threatening problems can occur both during the establishment and maintenance phases of a regional block which require prompt recognition and management.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the role of a previously described core algorithm "COVER ABCD-A SWIFT CHECK", supplemented by a specific sub-algorithm for regional anaesthesia, in the management of problems arising in association with regional anaesthesia.

METHODS

The potential performance of this structured approach was assessed for each of the relevant incidents among the first 4000 reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS).

RESULTS

There were 252 incidents involving regional anaesthesia, 6.3% of the first 4000 reports to AIMS. Of these, the majority (78%) involved the use of epidural or spinal anaesthesia. The core algorithm AB COVER CD properly applied, would have accounted for 45% of all problems, and is worth applying to eliminate unexpected problems unrelated to the regional anaesthesia technique itself. Hypotension and dysrhythmias made up over 30% of all incidents and accounted for all six deaths in the 252 incidents. The specific sub-algorithm for regional anaesthetic techniques accounted for 55% of all incidents: problems with delivery to the site of action, 49 cases (19%); problems with the block, 30 cases (12%); local anaesthetic toxicity, 30 cases (12%); trauma, infection, or pain, 14 cases (6%), wrong side or wrong patient, five cases (2%).

CONCLUSION

Based on an analysis of 252 incidents, the core algorithm and the regional anaesthesia sub-algorithm, properly applied, would lead to swift recognition and appropriate management of problems arising in association with regional anaesthesia.

Review of the Australian incident monitoring system

BACKGROUND

A survey was conducted to assess the benefits and limitations of the Australian Incident Monitoring System (AIMS) as a programme to improve patient safety.

METHODS

A 12-point questionnaire was sent to 12 current users of AIMS in November 2002.

RESULTS

The AIMS provides a consistent system of coding, trending and monitoring of incident data. It promotes a patient safety culture and an awareness of system error. Other benefits include the building of teamwork and the implementation of strategies to reduce the prevalence and severity of incidents. The majority of respondents (83%) reported that AIMS investigations resulted in significant changes to equipment usage, medication prescribing or administration, clinical protocols, training programmes and falls risk assessment tools. Although 75% of users reported improvements in patient outcomes, these were difficult to measure. A major limitation of AIMS was the low rate of incident reporting by medical staff. Voluntary reporting systems did not capture all incident data and the information was often too generic for root cause analysis. There were difficulties benchmarking data and concerns were raised regarding the ownership of information. The programme requires ongoing resources to implement change strategies and to maintain incident reporting levels. On a scale of 1 (poor rating) to 10 (excellent rating) the mean benefit rating was 7.6.

CONCLUSION

The Australian Incident Monitoring System is beneficial as a component of a clinical risk management strategy. Usefulness could be improved by increased participation by medical staff. The level of resources required should not be underestimated if the programme is to demonstrate improvements to patient outcomes. More recent versions of AIMS promise improved capabilities and will require similar evaluation.

Medication errors in anaesthesia and critical care

There is an increasing recognition that medication errors are causing a substantial global public health problem, as many result in harm to patients and increased costs to health providers. However, study of medication error is hampered by difficulty with definitions, research methods and study populations. Few doctors are as involved in the process of prescribing, selecting, preparing and giving drugs as anaesthetists, whether their practice is based in the operating theatre, critical care or pain management. Anaesthesia is now safe and routine, yet anaesthetists are not immune from making medication errors and the consequences of their mistakes may be more serious than those of doctors in other specialties. Steps are being taken to determine the extent of the problem of medication error in anaesthesia. New technology, theories of human error and lessons learnt from the nuclear, petrochemical and aviation industries are being used to tackle the problem.

Use of intrathecal morphine for postoperative pain relief after elective laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Laparoscopic surgery has become popular in recent years, but few studies have addressed analgesia for this type of surgery. We conducted a prospective double-blind randomised trial on 36 cases of laparoscopic colorectal surgery to determine the influence of intrathecal morphine on postoperative pain relief. All patients received a subarachnoid block with local anaesthetic in addition to general anaesthesia. One group also received intrathecal morphine. A patient-controlled analgesic (PCA) device was prescribed for pain control postoperatively and the visual analogue score (VAS) was used for pain assessment. The group who received intrathecal morphine used significantly less morphine. There were no adverse cardiovascular effects of the combined anaesthetic technique. Nausea and vomiting remained the main side-effect of intrathecal morphine but this was easily treated with anti-emetics.

Hypotension, subarachnoid block and the elderly patient

This article reviews the current literature on the management of hypotension during subarachnoid block in the elderly. Hypotension results from blockade of the sympathetic nervous system, which causes decreases in both systemic vascular resistance and cardiac output. Abolition of normal cardiovascular reflexes is also important and may explain unexpected cardiac arrests during subarachnoid block. Untreated block in the elderly results in decreases in systolic arterial pressure, systemic vascular resistance and central venous pressure. Cardiac output appears not to decrease as has been previously reported and heart rate is affected by several different factors. Preload to the heart should be maintained during block by giving adequate intravenous fluids and 8 ml.kg-1 is satisfactory in most cases. Adequate preloading prevents decreases in cardiac output and unexpected cardiac arrests. In this respect, mild head down till is also beneficial. Ideally, intravenous fluid should be given as the block is developing. Excessive fluid administration serves no useful purpose and can cause fluid overload and urinary retention. If systolic arterial pressure decreases by more than 25%, or to below 90 mmHg, treatment with a vasopressor is indicated. The efficacy of ephedrine has recently been questioned, as it is a poor vasoconstrictor and inotrope in the elderly. The alpha-adrenoceptor agonists may prove a more logical choice, because they increase both peripheral resistance and preload. Metaraminol by infusion (< 10 ml.h-1 of 10 mg in 20 ml) has been used successfully, though hypertension can occur.

The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. Which monitor? An analysis of 2000 incident reports

The role of monitors in patients undergoing general anaesthesia was studied by analysing the first 2000 incidents reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study; 1256 (63%) were considered applicable to this study. In 52% of these a monitor detected the incident first; oximetry (27%) and capnography (24%) detected over half of the monitor detected incidents, the electrocardiograph 19%, blood pressure monitors 12%, a low pressure (circuit) alarm 8%, and the oxygen analyser 4%. Of the other monitors used, 5 first detected 1-2% of incidents, and the remaining 8 less than 0.5% each. The oximeter would have detected over 40% of the monitor detected incidents had its more informative modulated pulse tone always been relied upon instead of the "bleep" of the ECG. A theoretical analysis was then carried out to determine which of an array of 17 monitors would reliably have detected each incident had each monitor been used on its own and had the incident been allowed to evolve. To facilitate "scoring" of monitors, the incidents were categorized empirically into 60 clinical situations; 40% of applicable incidents were accounted for by only 5 clinical situations, 60% by 10 and nearly 80% by 20. 98% were accounted for by the 60 situations. A pulse oximeter, used on its own, would theoretically have detected 82% of applicable incidents (nearly 60% before any potential for organ damage). These figures for capnography are 55% and 43% and for oximetry and capnography combined are 88% and 65%, respectively. With the addition of blood pressure monitoring these become 93% and 65%, and of an oxygen analyser, 95 and 67%. Other monitors, including the ECG, each increase the yield by by less than 0.5%. The international monitoring recommendations and those of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists are thoroughly vindicated by the patterns revealed in this study. The priority sequence of monitor acquisition for those with limited resources should be stethoscope, sphygmomanometer, oxygen analyser if nitrous oxide is to be used, pulse oximeter, capnograph, high pressure alarm, and, if patients are to be mechanically ventilated, a low pressure alarm (or spirometer with alarm); an ECG, a defibrillator, a spirometer and a thermometer should be available.

The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. System failure: an analysis of 2000 incident reports

Although 70-80% of problems have some component of human error, its overall contribution to many problems may be small; studies of complex systems have revealed that up to 85% are primarily due to deficiencies in the lay-out and processes of the system. The anaesthetist has to operate in a complex system; many problems originate from deficiencies in this system. Information of relevance to system failure was extracted from the first 2000 incidents reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS). A system-based deficiency directly contributed to one-quarter of problems (four-fifths if human factors are included), some aspect of the system minimized the adverse outcome in over half of all cases (four-fifths if human factors are included), and in two-thirds (three-quarters if human factors are included) a system-based strategy would have been helpful; the system was implicated in 90% of all incidents (97% if human factors are included). Regardless of whether or not all human error should be regarded as part of the "system", attempts to modify its incidence and nature have to emanate from the system. AIMS reporting pathways and the organizations involved in developing and implementing strategies to improve the system operate at four levels. Level I involves the use of AIMS reports by hospitals and group practices for audit at a local level. Level II involves AIMS participants sending forms to the AIMS central office; collated information is then sent back to contributors by newsletter. Level III involves interaction between AIMS and the major professional bodies and level IV interaction between AIMS, these bodies and a variety of national and international agencies. Over 100 topics were identified from the AIMS data for consideration at one or more of these levels. AIMS has the potential not only to play a vital practical role in the continued enhancement of the quality of anaesthetic practice, but also to provide a valuable resource for research at the increasingly important interface between human behaviour and complex systems.

The Australian Incident Monitoring Study: an analysis of 2000 incident reports

The Australian Patient Safety Foundation was formed in 1987; it was decided to set up and co-ordinate the Australian Incident Monitoring Study as a function of this Foundation; 90 hospitals and practices joined the study. Participating anaesthetists were invited to report, on an anonymous and voluntary basis, any unintended incident which reduced, or could have reduced, the safety margin for a patient. Any incident could be reported, not only those which were deemed "preventable" or were thought to involve human error. The Mark I AIMS form was developed which incorporated features and concepts from several other studies. All the incidents in this symposium were reported using this form, which contains general instructions to the reporter, key words and space for a narrative of the incident, structured sections for what happened (with subsections for circuitry incidents, circuitry involved, equipment involved, pharmacological incidents and airway incidents), why it happened (with subsections for factors contributing to the incident, factors minimising the incident and suggested corrective strategies), the type of anaesthesia and procedure, monitors in use, when and where the incident happened, the experience of the personnel involved, patient age and a classification of patient outcome. Enrollment, reporting and data-handling procedures are described. Data on patient outcome are presented; this is correlated with the stages at which the incident occurred and with the ASA status of the patients. The locations at which the incidents occurred and the types of procedures, the sets of incidents analysed in detail and a breakdown of the incidents due to drugs are also presented.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)