Process analysis in outpatient knee surgery: effects of regional and general anesthesia on anesthesia-controlled time.

BACKGROUND: The performance of anesthetic procedures before operating room entry (e.g., with either general or regional anesthesia [RA] induction rooms) should decrease anesthesia-controlled time in the operating room. The authors retrospectively studied the associations between anesthesia techniques and anesthesia-controlled time, evaluating one surgeon performing a single procedure over a 3-yr period. The authors hypothesized that, using the anesthesia care team model, RA would be associated with reduced anesthesia-controlled time compared with general anesthesia (GA) alone or combined general-regional anesthesia (GA-RA). METHODS: The authors queried an institutional database for 369 consecutive patients undergoing the same procedure (anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction) performed by one surgeon over a 3-yr period (July 1995 through June 1998). Throughout the period of study, anesthesia staffing consisted of an attending anesthesiologist medically directing two nurse anesthetists in two operating rooms. Anesthesia-controlled time values were compared based on anesthesia techniques (GA, RA, or GA-RA) using one-way analysis of variance, general linear modeling using time-series and seasonal adjustments, and chi-square tests when appropriate. P < 0. 05 was considered significant. RESULTS: RA was associated with the lowest anesthesia-controlled time (11.4 +/- 1.3 min, mean +/- 2 SEM). GA-RA (15.7 +/- 1.0 min) was associated with lower anesthesia-controlled time than GA used alone (20.3 +/- 1.2 min). CONCLUSIONS: When compared with GA without an induction room for outpatients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, RA with an induction room was associated with the lowest anesthesia- controlled time. Managers must weigh the costs and time required for anesthesiologists and additional personnel to place nerve blocks or induce GA preoperatively in such a staffing model.

Benchmarking the perioperative process: II. Introducing anesthesia clinical pathways to improve processes and outcomes and to reduce nursing labor intensity in ambulatory orthopedic surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: (1) To introduce anesthesia clinical pathways as a management tool to improve the quality of care; (2) to use the Procedural Times Glossary published by the Association of Anesthesia Clinical Directors (AACD) as a template for data collection and analysis; and (3) to determine the effects of anesthesia clinical pathways on surgical processes, outcomes, and costs in common ambulatory orthopedic surgery. DESIGN: Hospital database and patient chart review of consecutive patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) during academic years (AY) 1995-1996 and 1996-1997. Patient data from AY 1995-1996, during which no intraoperative anesthesia clinical pathways existed, served as historical controls. Data from AY 1996-1997, during which intraoperative anesthesia clinical pathways were used, served as the treatment group. Regional anesthesia options were routinely offered to patients in the clinical pathway. SETTING: Ambulatory surgery center in a teaching hospital. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The records of 503 ASA physical status I and II patients were reviewed. 1996-1997 patients underwent clinical pathway anesthesia care in which the intraoperative and postoperative anesthesia process was standardized with respect to symptom management, drugs, and equipment used. 1995-1996 patients did not have a standardized intraoperative and postoperative anesthetic course with respect to the management of common symptoms or to specific drugs and supplies used. Intervals described in the AACD Procedural Times Glossary, anesthesia drug and supply costs, and patient outcome variables (postoperative nursing interventions required and unexpected admissions), as influenced by the use of the anesthesia clinical pathway, were measured. Clinical pathway anesthesia care of ACLR in 1996-1997, which actively incorporated regional anesthesia options, reduced pharmacy and materials cost variability; slightly increased turnover time; improved intraoperative anesthesia and surgical efficiency, recovery times, and unexpected admission rates; and decreased the number of required nursing interventions for common postoperative symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical pathway patient management systems in anesthesia care are likely to produce useful outcome data of current practice patterns when compared with historical controls. This management tool may be useful in simultaneously containing costs and improving process efficiency and patient outcomes.

Benchmarking the perioperative process: III. Effects of regional anesthesia clinical pathway techniques on process efficiency and recovery profiles in ambulatory orthopedic surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: (1) To incorporate regional anesthesia options for common outpatient orthopedic surgery into clinical pathways; (2) to use the clinical pathway format and the Procedural Times Glossary published by the Association of Anesthesia Clinical Directors (AACD) as management tools to measure postoperative same-day surgery processes and discharge outcomes; and (3) to determine the effects of general, regional, and combined general-regional anesthesia on these processes and outcomes. DESIGN: Hospital database and patient chart review of consecutive patients undergoing anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) during academic years (AY) 1995-1996 and 1996-1997. Patient data from AY 1995-1996, during which no intraoperative anesthesia clinical pathway existed, served as historical controls. Data from AY 1996-1997, during which intraoperative anesthesia clinical pathways were used, served as the treatment group. SETTING: Ambulatory surgery center in a teaching hospital. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The records of 503 ASA physical status I and II patients were reviewed. 1996-1997 patients selected general anesthesia (+/- femoral nerve block) or epidural anesthesia, after which the remainder of the perioperative anesthesia process was standardized with respect to the drugs and equipment used. 1995-1996 patients did not necessarily have a choice in anesthesia technique and did not have a standardized perioperative anesthetic course with respect to specific drugs and supplies. Intervals described in the AACD Procedural Times Glossary, anesthesia drug and supply costs, and patient outcome variables (postoperative nursing interventions required and unexpected admissions), as influenced by anesthesia technique used, were measured. Combined general-regional anesthesia care for ACLR in 1996-1997, when compared with general anesthesia alone, led to increased pharmacy and materials costs and increased turnover time. However, patients with the combined technique showed improved recovery profiles and lower unexpected admission rates, and they required fewer nursing interventions for common postoperative symptoms. Patients receiving epidural anesthesia showed discharge outcomes similar to those patients receiving general anesthesia with femoral nerve block. Postanesthesia care unit bypass (fast-tracking) was more likely in clinical pathway regional anesthesia patients, when compared with the clinical pathway general anesthesia used. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical pathway regional anesthesia care for outpatient orthopedics may have a significant role in simultaneously containing costs and improving both process efficiency and patient outcomes.