Difficult Tracheal Intubation and Airway Outcomes after Radiation for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to characterize the incidence and management of difficult tracheal intubations (DTIs) in nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC) after primary radiation therapy (RT). METHODS: The study was a retrospective review of airway assessment and outcomes in post-RT NPC patients. Primary analysis was performed on patients who underwent post-RT procedures, who were split into non-DTI and DTI groups. Patients were classified as DTI if they (i) required >1 attempt to intubate, (ii) failed to be intubated, or (iii) experienced complications attributed to airway management. Secondary analysis was performed between patients who underwent post-RT procedures (procedure group) and those who did not (control group). RESULTS: One-hundred and fifty patients were included, and 71.3% underwent post-RT procedures, with no differences in characteristics between the procedure and control groups. One-hundred and fifty procedures were identified, and 28.0% were categorized as DTI. There was no difference in patient characteristics or airway assessment measures between DTI and non-DTI groups. Regression analysis revealed concurrent cervical mobility restriction, and trismus increased DTI incidence by 7.1-fold (p = 0.011). Being non-White was an independent predictor of DTI. The incidence of high-grade intraoperative laryngoscopic view was lower in the non-DTI compared to the DTI group (20.4% vs. 64.3%, p < 0.0001). Failure to intubate occurred in 2.0% of cases, and 6.0% cases had perioperative complications. Based on preoperative assessment, sensitivity of predicting DTI was 54.8% and specificity was 63.9%. CONCLUSION: NPC patients frequently undergo post-RT procedures requiring complex airway management. Rates of DTI and failed intubation are significantly higher than those in the general surgical population, and the ability to predict DTI with standard preoperative airway measures is poor. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 134:120-126, 2024.

Movement-evoked Pain versus Pain at Rest in Postsurgical Clinical Trials and in Meta-analyses: An Updated Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Given the widespread recognition that postsurgical movement-evoked pain is generally more intense, and more functionally relevant, than pain at rest, the authors conducted an update to a previous 2011 review to re-evaluate the assessment of pain at rest and movement-evoked pain in more recent postsurgical analgesic clinical trials. METHODS: The authors searched MEDLINE and Embase for postsurgical pain randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses published between 2014 and 2023 in the setting of thoracotomy, knee arthroplasty, and hysterectomy using methods consistent with the original 2011 review. Included trials and meta-analyses were characterized according to whether they acknowledged the distinction between pain at rest and movement-evoked pain and whether they included pain at rest and/or movement-evoked pain as a pain outcome. For trials measuring movement-evoked pain, pain-evoking maneuvers used to assess movement-evoked pain were tabulated. RESULTS: Among the 944 included trials, 504 (53%) did not measure movement-evoked pain (vs. 61% in 2011), and 428 (45%) did not distinguish between pain at rest and movement-evoked pain when defining the pain outcome (vs. 52% in 2011). Among the 439 trials that measured movement-evoked pain, selection of pain-evoking maneuver was highly variable and, notably, was not even described in 139 (32%) trials (vs. 38% in 2011). Among the 186 included meta-analyses, 94 (51%) did not distinguish between pain at rest and movement-evoked pain (vs. 71% in 2011). CONCLUSIONS: This updated review demonstrates a persistent limited proportion of trials including movement-evoked pain as a pain outcome, a substantial proportion of trials failing to distinguish between pain at rest and movement-evoked pain, and a lack of consistency in the use of pain-evoking maneuvers for movement-evoked pain assessment. Future postsurgical trials need to (1) use common terminology surrounding pain at rest and movement-evoked pain, (2) assess movement-evoked pain in virtually every trial if not contraindicated, and (3) standardize movement-evoked pain assessment with common, procedure-specific pain-evoking maneuvers. More widespread knowledge translation and mobilization are required in order to disseminate this message to current and future investigators.

An evaluation of the accuracy and self-reported confidence of clinicians in using the ASA-PS Classification System.

OBJECTIVES: The American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) is a grading system routinely adopted worldwide by physicians to classify patients' overall health status. Concerns have been raised surrounding the subjectiveness of this system, potentially leading to poor inter-rater agreement/reliability. We hypothesized that physicians are overconfident when assigning ASA-PS scores and that presenting them with the ASA-PS definitions/examples would improve accuracy. We therefore evaluated participants' accuracy and self-reported confidence on the ASA-PS Classification System (1) while assigning ASA-PS according to their baseline knowledge/judgment; and (2) after a single exposure to the ASA-PS definitions/examples. DESIGN: Prospective before-and-after web-based study. PARTICIPANTS: 272 anesthesiologists and 114 non-anesthesiologists. INTERVENTIONS: Participants voluntarily answered a web-based questionnaire consisting of 10 hypothetical cases. They were asked to assign an ASA-PS score and rate their perceived self-confidence level (20-100%) on the accuracy of their assigned score for each case both (1) before and (2) after reviewing the ASA-PS definitions/examples. The correct ASA-PS for each hypothetical case was determined by consensus among investigators. MEASUREMENTS: Participants' accuracy, self-reported confidence, and calibration of confidence on the application of ASA-PS Classification System. Agreement between measures was tested using kappa coefficient. RESULTS: Anesthesiologists had better accuracy than non-anesthesiologists both on initial [6(5-7) vs. 4(3-5) out of 10; p < 0.001] as well as subsequent [7(6-8) vs. 6(4-7); p < 0.001] ASA-PS score assignments. Participants' self-reported confidence was greater than their accuracy for assigned ASA-PS scores (p < 0.001). ASA-PS agreement between anesthesiologists and non-anesthesiologists was poor (κ < 0.20). Participants' accuracy for hypothetical cases of ASA-PS I, II, and III involving adult patients was overall greater than for ASA-PS IV, V, and III (the latter involving a neonate) for both anesthesiologists and non-anesthesiologists (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Physicians tend to disagree and be overconfident when assigning ASA-PS scores. A brief consultation of the ASA-PS definitions/examples improves the accuracy for both anesthesiologists and non-anesthesiologists.

System for Central Venous Catheterization Training Using Computer Vision-Based Workflow Feedback.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a system for training central venous catheterization that does not require an expert observer. We propose a training system that uses video-based workflow recognition and electromagnetic tracking to provide trainees with real-time instruction and feedback. METHODS: The system provides trainees with prompts about upcoming tasks and visual cues about workflow errors. Most tasks are recognized from a webcam video using a combination of a convolutional neural network and a recurrent neural network. We evaluated the system's ability to recognize tasks in the workflow by computing the percent of tasks that were recognized and the average signed transitional delay between the system and reviewers. We also evaluated the usability of the system using a participant questionnaire. RESULTS: The system was able to recognize 86.2% of tasks in the workflow. The average signed transitional delay was -0.7s. The average usability score on the questionnaire was 4.7 out of 5 for the system overall. The participants found the interactive task list to be the most useful component of the system with an average score of 4.8 out of 5. CONCLUSION: Overall, the participants' response to the system was positive. Participants perceived that the system would be useful for central venous catheterization training. Our system provides trainees with meaningful instruction and feedback without needing an expert observer to be present. SIGNIFICANCE: We are able to provide trainees with more opportunities to access instruction and meaningful feedback by using workflow recognition.

Comparison of strategies for adherence to venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in high-risk surgical patients: a before and after intervention study.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major cause of perioperative morbimortality. Despite significant efforts to advance evidence-based practice, prevention rates remain inadequate in many centres. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of different strategies aimed at improving adherence to adequate VTE prophylaxis in surgical patients at high risk of VTE. METHOD: Before and after intervention study conducted at a tertiary hospital. Adherence to adequate VTE prophylaxis was compared according to three strategies consecutively implemented from January 2019 to December 2020. A dedicated hospitalist physician alone (strategy A) or in conjunction with a nurse (strategy B) overlooked the postoperative period to ensure adherence and correct inadequacies. Finally, a multidisciplinary team approach (strategy C) focused on promoting adequate VTE prophylaxis across multiple stages of care-from the operating room (ie, preoperative team-based checklist) to collaboration with clinical pharmacists in the postoperative period-was implemented. RESULTS: We analysed 2074 surgical patients: 783 from January to June 2019 (strategy A), 669 from July 2019 to May 2020 (strategy B), and 622 from June to December 2020 (strategy C). VTE prophylaxis adherence rates for strategies (A), (B) and (C) were (median (25th-75th percentile)) 43.29% (31.82-51.69), 50% (42.57-55.80) and 92.31% (91.38-93.51), respectively (p<0.001; C>A=B). There was a significant reduction in non-compliance on all analysed criteria (risk stratification (A (25.5%), B (22%), C (6%)), medical documentation (A (68%), B (55.2%) C (9%)) and medical prescription (A (51.85%), B (48%), C (6.10%)) after implementation of strategy C (p<0.05). Additionally, a significant increase in compliance with adequate dosage, dosing interval and scheduling of the prophylactic regimen was observed. CONCLUSION: Perioperative VTE prophylaxis strategies that relied exclusively on physicians and/or nurses were associated with suboptimal execution and prevention. A multidisciplinary team-based approach that covers multiple stages of patient care significantly increased adherence to adequate VTE prophylaxis in surgical patients at high risk of developing perioperative VTE.

Erector Spinae Plane Block When Neuraxial Analgesia Is Contraindicated by Clotting Abnormalities.

We describe 4 cases in which patients with coagulopathies, an absolute contraindication to epidural/paravertebral blocks, received an erector spinae plane block to manage severe thoracic pain with respiratory impairment. Intubation was avoided in 2 cases, and weaning from the ventilator was facilitated in 2 cases. Ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane block is simple to perform, has a low risk profile, and provides an excellent analgesic alternative.

Movement-Evoked Pain Versus Pain at Rest in Postsurgical Clinical Trials and Meta-Analyses: Protocol for a Follow-Up Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain is one of the most prevalent and disabling complications of surgery that is associated with personal suffering, delayed functional recovery, prolonged hospital stay, perioperative complications, and chronic postsurgical pain. Accumulating evidence has pointed to the important distinction between pain at rest (PAR) and movement-evoked pain (MEP) after surgery. In most studies including both measures, MEP has been shown to be substantially more severe than PAR. Furthermore, as MEP is commonly experienced during normal activities (eg, breathing, coughing, and walking), it has a greater adverse functional impact than PAR. In a previous systematic review conducted in 2011, only 39% of reviewed trials included MEP as a trial outcome and 52% failed to identify the pain outcome as either PAR or MEP. Given the recent observations of postsurgical pain trials that continue to neglect the distinction between PAR and MEP, this updated review seeks to evaluate the degree of progress in this area. OBJECTIVE: This updated review will include postsurgical clinical trials and meta-analyses in which the primary outcome was early postoperative pain intensity. The primary outcome for this review is the reporting of MEP (vs PAR) as an outcome measure for each trial and meta-analysis. Secondary outcomes include whether trials and meta-analyses distinguished between PAR and MEP. METHODS: To be consistent with the 2011 review that we are updating, this review will again focus on randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses, from Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online and EMBASE databases, focusing on pain treatment after thoracotomy, knee arthroplasty, and hysterectomy in humans. Trials and meta-analyses will be characterized as to whether or not they assessed PAR and MEP; whether their pain outcome acknowledged the distinction between PAR and MEP; and, for trials assessing MEP, which pain-evoking maneuver(s) were used. RESULTS: Scoping review and pilot data extraction are under way, and the results are expected by March 2020. CONCLUSIONS: It is our belief that every postsurgical analgesic trial should include MEP as an outcome measure. The previous 2011 review was expected to have an impact on more widespread assessment of MEP in subsequent postoperative pain treatment trials. Thus, the purpose of this follow-up review is to reevaluate the frequency of use of MEP as a trial outcome, compared with PAR, in more recently published postoperative pain trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42019125855; https://tinyurl.com/qw9dty8. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/15309.

At-a-glance - The local response to the Canadian opioid epidemic in the Kingston, Frontenac, and Lennox and Addington communities. / Aperçu - Mesures prises à l'échelle locale contre l'épidémie canadienne d'opioïdes dans les collectivités de Kingston, du comté de Frontenac et du comté de Lennox et Addington.

Canada is facing a national opioid overdose epidemic, with deaths due to opioid overdoses continuing to rise dramatically. To that end, the opioid experiences of the Kingston, Frontenac, and Lennox and Addington communities, the regional hub for southeastern Ontario and the home of Queen's University, may provide meaningful insights. This article provides a description of recent activities to address the local opioid crisis, a rationale for their adoption and the context in which they are being undertaken.

In 2018, there were 200 opioidrelated emergency department visits, 66 opioid-related hospitalizations, and 23 opioid-related deaths in the Kingston, Frontenac, and Lennox and Addington (KFLA) public health region. Based on an age/sex-standardized comparison, this ranked KFLA as the ninth highest for opioid-related deaths out of the 35 public health regions in Ontario. In response to the local opioid crisis, KFLA has upgraded or launched multiple grassroots organizations, including Street Health Centre, a community-based multidisciplinary addiction service, as well as an inpatient addiction medicine consult team. KFLA is rapidly developing into an academic centre of excellence for addiction medicine. The lessons learned locally will help to inform future opioid policy and curriculum design.

En 2018, 200 visites aux services d'urgence liées aux opioïdes, 66 hospitalisations liées aux opioïdes et 23 décès liés aux opioïdes ont été recensés dans la circonscription sanitaire de Kingston, Frontenac et Lennox et Addington (KFLA). Après normalisation en fonction de l'âge et du sexe, ce résultat place la circonscription sanitaire de KFLA au neuvième rang des 35 circonscriptions sanitaires de l'Ontario sur le plan des décès liés aux opioïdes. En réponse à la crise locale des opioïdes, la circonscription sanitaire de KFLA a adapté ou créé plusieurs organismes communautaires, notamment le Street Health Centre, un centre pluridisciplinaire communautaire de services de dépendance, ainsi qu'un groupe de consultation sur le traitement des dépendances chez les patients hospitalisés. La circonscription sanitaire de KFLA est rapidement en train de devenir un centre universitaire d'excellence en traitement des dépendances. Les leçons dégagées à l'échelle locale vont pouvoir aider à orienter les politiques relatives aux opioïdes et la conception de programmes.