The Thai Anesthesia Incident Monitoring Study (Thai AIMS) of desaturation: an analysis of 1,996 incident reports.

BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE: The present study is a part of the Multicentered Study of Model of Anesthesia related Adverse Events in Thailand by Incident Report (The Thai Anesthesia Incident Monitoring Study or Thai AIMS). The objective of the present study was to determine the frequency distribution, outcomes, contributory factors, and factors minimizing incident. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The present study is a prospective descriptive research design. The authors extracted relevant data from the incident reports on oxygen desaturation from the Thai AIMS database and analyzed during the study period between January and June 2007. RESULTS: From the relevant 445 incidents, most of the incidents (89%) occurred in patients receiving general anesthesia. The incidence in patients receiving regional anesthesia was 4.0%. The events mostly occurred in patients aged between 16-65 years (52.8%). Most of the events (76%) took place in the operating theater during the induction period (30.1%). More than 81% of the patients experienced severe oxygen desaturation (SpO2 < 85%). There were 55 patients (12.4%) who had unplanned ICU admission and 2 patients (0.4%) who had unplanned hospital admission. Factors that may relate to the incident involve combined factors (50.8%). Anesthetic factors were found to involve 38.4% of incidents. The common contributing factors that might lead to the incidents were inexperienced (57.5%), inappropriate decision (56.2%), and haste (23.8%). For factors minimizing incident, the important factors were vigilance (86.3%), experienced in that tropic (71.2%), and experienced assistance (54.8%). Quality assurance activity was the most common suggestive corrective strategy (79.1%). The others were improvement of supervision (47.2%) and guideline practice (46.5%). CONCLUSION: To lower the incidence of oxygen desaturation, the anesthesia personnel has to improve the anesthesia services by quality assurance activity, improvement of supervision, clinical practice guidelines, and additional training.

A survey of awareness, opinion and reported use of clinical practice guidelines (CPG) of the Royal College of Anesthesiologists of Thailand.

BACKGROUND: Up to the present (2006), The Royal College of Anesthesiologists of Thailand (RCAT) has proposed and revised six practice guidelines. For guidelines to achieve their objectives, anyone who gets involved needs to be aware of the guidelines, be able to accept, and adhere to them. Although the authors did introduce their guidelines by several passive means, the authors have not yet ascertained what the result were. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of the present study was to assess awareness, opinion, limitation, and reported use of guidelines. The secondary objective was to identify factors associated with variation, agreement, and reported use of guidelines. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A cross sectional, self-report survey study was conducted. An anonymous questionnaire including prepaid-addressed reply envelopes was mailed to 600 anesthesiologists and 1,300 nurse anesthetists, nationwide, based on the college's list. The questions covered respondents' general characteristics: awareness, agreement, and reported use of the existing guidelines; opinion on implementation media, which guidelines the members need, their local guidelines, and the impact of guidelines on their practice. All data were extracted and reported using descriptive statistics. Multiple logistic regression was done to identify factors associated with an agreement with and a reported use of the guidelines. RESULTS: The overall response rate was 33.4% and nurse anesthetists had a higher response than anesthesiologists. Forty-six percent of the respondents were aware of the existing guidelines. This result corresponded to percentage of those who had read the guidelines (41%). Among the six existing guidelines, the least two guidelines reported use of and agreement with, were those for labor analgesia and conscious sedation (23-28%, 24-28%). The guidelines for spinal anesthesia received the most response (46%). For respondents who had read the guidelines, most of them (80% to 94%) rated the level of agreement and reported use as good to excellent. The respondents also rated the announcement of the guidelines during the annual meeting of the Royal College of Anesthesiologists of Thailand as the best implementation strategy. Impracticability, inadequate dissemination, and un-cooperation among colleagues were the three most important obstacles of using the guidelines. In addition, the present study demonstrated three significant factors, anesthesiologists, regional hospitals, and general hospitals, as associated with reporting frequent use of and high agreement with the guidelines. CONCLUSION: The low level of awareness and reported use of the present guidelines among the members reflects poor implementation and dissemination. However the present study reveals some information that will guide the authors to introduce intensive and targeted interventions to encourage the members to comply and adhere to the guidelines designed to improve the quality of patients' care.