Feedback system to estimate the quality of outpatient preoperative evaluation records: an analysis of end-user satisfaction.

BACKGROUND: During preanaesthesia evaluation at an outpatient clinic, information is summarized and structured. We aimed to estimate the effectiveness of this process by determining the proportion of patients presenting for surgery who had valid preoperative anaesthesia assessment records, and also the proportion of patients with a record that contained sufficient information. METHODS: This study included all non-cardiac surgery procedures performed in adults in 2006 and 2007 in a university hospital. In each case, we asked the anaesthesiologist actually providing anaesthesia to assess the quality of the preoperative record on an electronic feedback form showing a predefined drop down menu and a free text box. The primary outcome was the proportion of procedures with a valid record (< 6 months old) that also contained sufficient and adequate information to safely provide anaesthesia. Secondly, all predefined remarks were assessed for relevance and the proportion of (relevant) remarks per individual anaesthesiologist was calculated. RESULTS: During the study period, 21 454 procedures were performed. A valid record was available in 20 700 procedures (97%). In 459 (2%) cases, a remark (mostly about not detected comorbidity) was given by the anaesthesia provider, of which 347 (76%) were assessed as 'relevant', resulting in 20 353 (95%) valid records containing sufficient and adequate information. Between individual anaesthesiologists, the percentage remarks ranged from 0.4% to 12.7%. CONCLUSIONS: On entering the operating theatre, 95% of elective surgery patients had a preanaesthesia evaluation record that contained sufficient and adequate information to safely provide anaesthesia. There was large variability in reporting remarks.

Long-term propofol infusion and cardiac failure in adult head-injured patients.

Five adult patients with head injuries inexplicably had fatal cardiac arrests In our neurosurgical intensive-care unit after the introduction of a sedation formulation containing an increased concentration of propofol. To examine the possible relation further, we did a retrospective cohort analysis of head-injured adults admitted to our unit between 1996 and 1999 who were sedated and mechanically ventilated. 67 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom seven were judged to have died from propofol-infusion syndrome. The odds ratio for the occurrence of the syndrome was 1.93 (95% CI 1.12-3.32, p=0.018) for every mg/kg per h increase in mean propofol dose above 5 mg/kg per h. We suggest that propofol infusion at rates higher than 5 mg/kg per h should be discouraged for long-term sedation in the intensive-care unit.