Prevalence of anaesthesia information management systems in university-affiliated hospitals in Europe.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: An increasing number of studies suggest that anaesthesia information management systems (AIMS) improve clinical care. The purpose of this web survey study was to assess the prevalence of AIMS in European university-affiliated anaesthesia departments and to identify the motivations for and barriers to AIMS adoption. METHODS: A survey was e-mailed to 252 academic anaesthesia chairs of 294 university-affiliated hospitals in 22 European countries, with 41 e-mails returned as undeliverable, leaving the final sample equal to 211. Responders provided information on demographics, the other information technology systems available in their hospitals, and current implementation status of AIMS. Adopters were asked about motivations for installing AIMS, whereas nonadopters were asked about barriers to AIMS adoption. RESULTS: Eighty-six (29%) of 294 hospitals responded. Forty-four of the 86 departments (51%) were considered AIMS adopters because they were already using (n = 15), implementing (n = 13) or selecting an AIMS (n = 16). The 42 remaining departments (49%) were considered nonadopters as they were not expecting to install an AIMS owing to lack of funds (n = 27), other reasons (n = 13) such as lack of support from the information technology department, or simply did not have a plan (n = 2). The top ranked motivators for adopting AIMS were improved clinical documentation, improvement in patient care and safety, and convenience for anaesthesiologists. AIMS adopters were more likely than nonadopters to already have other information technology systems deployed throughout the hospital. CONCLUSION: At least 44 (or 15%) of the 294 university-affiliated departments surveyed in this study have already implemented, are implementing, or are currently selecting an AIMS. The main barrier identified by AIMS nonadopters is lack of funds.

Staffing the operating room suite: perspectives from Europe and North America on the role of different anesthesia personnel.

In North America and Europe, a spectrum of anesthesia personnel exists to deliver anesthesia care. The common transatlantic features, however, are increasing demand for and shortage of anesthesia caregivers. Mechanisms counteracting this shortage include increased entry into practice from higher numbers of anesthesia residents and changes in the delivery of anesthesia care by extension of the role of nonphysician anesthesia providers. The training, professional and technical roles, and workforce contribution of anesthesiologists, anesthetists, and various support personnel in Europe and the United States are described. Current and future factors influencing the relationship between provider availability, use, and demand differ across the Atlantic and within Europe.

The value proposition of anesthesia information management systems.

Anesthesia information management systems add value to the anesthesiologist and the hospital above that which is provided by manual anesthesia records. The more complete documentation and less biased recording of vital signs in this system, relative to manual records, provide data needed for quality initiatives and operating room management and for clinical research. The system can improve the ability to increase anesthesia charge capture, meet the requirements of pay-for-performance programs, and assist in the defense of malpractice allegations. Realization of value from the anesthesia information management systems requires additional expenditures of resources to adapt the systems to meet specific institutional requirements.

Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by academic departments in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Information technology has been promoted as a way to improve patient care and outcomes. Whereas information technology systems for ancillary hospital services (e.g., radiology, pharmacy) are deployed commonly, it has been estimated that anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) are only installed in a small fraction of United States (US) operating rooms. In this study, we assessed the adoption of AIMS at academic anesthesia departments and explored the motivations for and resistance to AIMS adoption. METHODS: Members of the Society of Academic Anesthesiology Chairs and the Association of Anesthesiology Program Directors were solicited by e-mail to participate in an online survey of AIMS adoption. Two months after closing the survey, another e-mail was sent with a single question asking for an update to their AIMS implementation status. RESULTS: Surveys were fully completed by 48 (34%) of the 140 Society of Academic Anesthesiology Chairs and Association of Anesthesiology Program Directors departments surveyed, with 72 (51%) providing AIMS status information. Twenty of these 72 departments have an AIMS installed, 12 are currently implementing, 11 have selected but not yet installed, and 18 are planning to purchase an AIMS in 2008 or 2009. Therefore, at least 61 (44%) of all 140 US academic anesthesia departments have committed to AIMS. This estimated adoption rate is conservative because the numerator equals the affirmative responses, whereas the denominator equals the total population of academic departments. Among adopters, the top ranked anticipated benefits from installing an AIMS included improved clinical documentation, improved data collection for clinical research, enhancement of quality improvement programs, and compliance with requirements of regulatory authorities. The hospital provided funding in almost all facilities (90%), with co-funding by the anesthesia group in 35%. CONCLUSIONS: At least 61 or 44% of the 140 US academic departments surveyed in this study have already implemented, are planning to acquire, or are currently searching for an AIMS. Adoption of AIMS technology appears to have reached sufficient momentum within academic anesthesiology departments to result in a fundamental change.

Mean operating room times differ by 50% among hospitals in different countries for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and lung lobectomy.

We explored whether there were large differences in operating room (OR) times for two common procedures performed by multiple surgeons at each of several hospitals thousands of miles apart. Mean OR time, "wheels in" to "wheels out," for ten consecutive cases of each of laparoscopic cholecystectomy and lung lobectomy were obtained for each of ten hospitals in eight countries from their OR logs. After log transformation, the OR times were analyzed by analysis of variance. Mean OR times differed significantly among hospitals (P = 0.006, laparoscopic cholecystectomy; P < 0.001, lung lobectomy). The second longest average OR time was 50% longer than the second shortest average OR time for both laparoscopic cholecystectomy and lung lobectomy. Differences in OR times among the hospitals we studied were large enough to affect the productivity of OR nurses and anesthesia providers. Thus, international benchmarking studies to understand differences in OR times worldwide may be beneficial.

Factors affecting supply and demand of anesthesiologists in Western Europe.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Current demographic and macroeconomic trends indicate that, in Western Europe, the demand for anesthesia services will continue to increase. It is, however, questionable whether there will be sufficient supply. RECENT FINDINGS: In Western Europe, admission to medical schools is typically restricted. The European Working Time Directive has decreased the clinical exposure of residents. Also, increasing feminization of the physician workforce and the aging of current practitioners may change the available workforce. Current healthcare reforms that include demand-lowering elements may also negatively affect supply and demand for anesthesiologists. SUMMARY: Steps must be taken to augment the number of practitioners to ensure a sufficient number of anesthesiologists. Employers will have to offer flexible working practices and adequate compensation to attract new anesthesiologists. Alternatively, more responsibilities and tasks may be allocated to well-trained anesthesia assistants (e.g. nurses). National anesthesia associations must improve and coordinate resident training, which may alleviate the recruitment problem. A European training standard in anesthesia might adjust the regional disequilibrium of supply and demand, as might salary competition. In the long run, the undersupply of anesthesiologists may be offset by factors such as more procedures being performed non-invasively and further demand-lowering healthcare policies.