ABSTRACT
Background and Aims: Anaesthesiologists have few opportunities to communicate with patients especially in preoperative period for various reasons. If these opportunities are not well utilized, anesthesiologists may not be able to educate patients about anaesthesia related issues. The aim of this study was to assess communication skill (CS) exhibited by the anesthesiology residents during the process of preoperative visit and informed consent. Material and Methods: This was a pre and post intervention questionnaire based study carried out in a presurgical ward of a tertiary hospital. During the process of preoperative visit and informed consent, fourteen of the second year anesthesia residents were assessed by faculty members for various aspects of CS using validated questionnaire on 3-point Likert's scale, before and after CS workshop. Residents' perception about workshop and patient satisfaction with regards to the preoperative visit and process of informed consent was assessed. Results were described in percentage value and a qualitative analysis was carried out. Results: While none of the residents exhibited 'excellent CS score' in the pre-workshop phase, six (42.86%) achieved the same after the workshop. One resident, who had 'poor CS score' moved to higher category score post workshop. The behavioural traits of professionalism, empathy, risk explanation and written consent showed statistically significant improvements post intervention by Wilcoxon Signed Rank Test, with P value < 0.05. All residents felt that good communication can improve patient satisfaction and CS training should be part of the post graduate curriculum. Conclusion: Conduct of CS workshop for anesthesia residents improved certain behavioral traits during anaesthesia preoperative visit and informed consent process. This important nontechnical skill of CS, may not be uniformly acquired during clinical training and should be specifically taught and evaluated as part of post graduate curriculum.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Patients with major burns posted for early tangential excision and skin grafting pose peculiar challenges for anaesthesiologists. The purpose of the study was to assess safety and efficacy of total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with tumescent infiltration anaesthesia (TIA) for these burn procedures. METHODS: This observational single-arm study was conducted on 48 cases of a tertiary centre burn unit, requiring early tangential excision and skin grafting between third and fifth days of burn injury. TIVA was administered using a combination of intravenous (iv) infusion of injection dexmedetomidine and iv boluses of fentanyl, ketamine, propofol, midazolam and paracetamol. TIA was administered in burn wounds after aseptic preparation. Spontaneous breathing was maintained with oxygen supplementation. Haemodynamic and respiratory monitoring was done intraoperatively every 15 minutes and for 6 hours postoperatively. Modified Aldrete's score was calculated at 10 minutes after completion of surgery. Statistical analysis was done using statistical package for the social science software (version 16). Descriptive statistics were used for quantitative variables. RESULTS: Baseline mean HR was 106.95 ± 11.17 bpm (beats per minute). HR settled at 73.17 ± 6.97 bpm during the intraoperative period. The baseline mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 82.42 ± 10.04 mmHg was maintained at 81 ± 7.32 mmHg during the intraoperative period. In all, 95.8% achieved early recovery with mean modified Aldrete's score of ≥9 at 10 minutes post-surgery. There was no episode of apnoea or desaturation. CONCLUSION: TIVA in combination with TIA minimally interferes with homeostasis and promotes early recovery in patients undergoing early excision and grafting in major burns.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Research is an integral component of medical education and practice. However, the art of medical writing remains neglected. Case report writing marks foray into the world of publications and presentations. We assessed and compared the impact of basic medical writing workshop about case report writing and their perception levels of confidence in these skills, among post-graduate anaesthesia students. METHODS: A needs assessment for medical writing skills was performed among all anaesthesia residents. A total of 20 students were enrolled in this study. The pre-workshop assignment consisted of writing one case report per participant within 30 days, followed by students' confidence assessment in these skills. A workshop on basic medical writing including analytical writing, scientific writing and plagiarism were conducted. Post-workshop a similar assignment was provided, followed by students' confidence assessment. RESULTS: Moderate-to-high need for help was felt by 92.63% for analytical skills, 100% for scientific skills and writing without plagiarism, 95.78% for overall writing skills. For case report writing, the analytical and scientific writing significantly improved after the workshop (P = 0.01 and P = 0.016, respectively). There was a significant improvement in the students' confidence levels post-workshop in their analytical writing skills, avoiding plagiarism and overall writing capabilities (P = 0.02, P = 0.016 and P = 0.002, respectively). CONCLUSION: Writing skills of participants and their confidence in these skills improved post-workshop.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: When a drug is used in a way that is different from that described in regulatory body approved drug label, it is said to be 'off label use'. Perioperative phase is sensitive from the point of view of patient safety and off-label drug use in this setup can prove to be hazardous to patient. Hence, it was planned to assess the pattern of drug utilisation and off-label use of perioperative medication during anaesthesia. METHODS: Preoperatively, demographic details and adverse events check list were filled from a total of 400 patients from general surgery, paediatric surgery and orthopaedics departments scheduled to undergo surgery. The perioperative assessment form was assessed to record all prescriptions followed by refilling of adverse events checklist in case record form. World Health Organization (WHO) prescribing indicators were used for analysis of drug utilisation data. National Formulary of India 2011 was used as reference material to decide off-label drug use in majority instances along with package insert. RESULTS: A total of 3705 drugs were prescribed to the 400 participants and average number of drugs per patient was 9.26 ± 3.33. Prescriptions by generic name were 68.07% whereas 85.3% drugs were prescribed from hospital schedule. Off-label drugs overall formed 20.19% of the drugs prescribed. At least one off-label drug was prescribed to 82.5% of patients. Inappropriate dose was the most common form of off-label use. There was 1.6 times greater risk of occurrence of adverse events associated with the use of off-label drugs. CONCLUSION: Prescription indicators were WHO compliant. Off-label drug use was practiced in anaesthesia department with questionable clinical justification in some instances.
