Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Anesth Analg ; 128(2): 335-341, 2019 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29958214

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The use of cognitive aids, such as emergency manuals (EMs), improves team performance on critical steps during crisis events. In our large academic anesthesia practice, we sought to broadly implement an EM and subsequently evaluate team member performance on critical steps. METHODS: We observed the phases of implementing an EM at a large academic anesthesia practice from 2013 to 2016, including the formation of the EM implementation team, identification of preferred EM characteristics, consideration of institution-specific factors, selection of the preferred EM, recognition of logistical barriers, and staff education. Utilization of the EM was tested in a regular clinical environment with all available resources using a standardized verbal simulation of 3 crisis events both preimplementation and 6 months postimplementation. Individual members of the anesthesia team were asked to verbalize interventions for specific crisis events over 60 seconds. RESULTS: We introduced a customized version of the Stanford Emergency Manual on January 26, 2015. Fifty-nine total participants (equal proportion of anesthesiology attending physicians, resident physicians, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and student registered nurse anesthetist staff) were surveyed in the preimplementation phase and 60 in the 6-month postimplementation phase. In the postimplementation phase, a minority (41.7%) utilized the EM for the verbal-simulated crisis events. Those who used the EM performed better than those who did not (median 21.0 critical steps out of a possible 30 total steps [70.0%], interquartile range 19-25 vs 18.0 critical steps verbalized [60.0%], interquartile range 16-20; P < .001). Among all subjects, the median number of critical steps verbalized was 16 (53.3%) preimplementation and 19.5 critical steps (65.0%) postimplementation. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an EM in a large academic anesthesia practice is not without challenges. While full integration of the EM was not achieved 6 months after implementation, verbalization of critical steps on 3 simulated crisis events improved when the EM was utilized.


Assuntos
Centros Médicos Acadêmicos/normas , Anestesia/normas , Competência Clínica/normas , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/normas , Manuais como Assunto/normas , Centros Médicos Acadêmicos/tendências , Anestesia/tendências , Serviços Médicos de Emergência/tendências , Humanos , Fluxo de Trabalho
2.
Anesthesiology ; 109(4): 588-95, 2008 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18813036

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The duration of time that elective noncardiac surgery (NCS) should be delayed after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with bare metal stents (BMSs) is unknown. METHODS: This large, single-center, retrospective study examined the relation between complication rate in patients with BMSs undergoing NCS and the duration of time between PCI and NCS. Primary endpoints included in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (death, myocardial infarction, stent thrombosis, or repeat revascularization with either coronary artery bypass grafting or PCI of the target vessel) and bleeding events. The relation between the events and the timing of noncardiac surgery after PCI with BMS was assessed using univariate analysis and multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: From January 1, 1990, to January 1, 2005, a total of 899 patients were identified. The frequency of major adverse cardiac events was 10.5% when NCS was performed less than 30 days after PCI with BMS, 3.8% when NCS was performed between 31 and 90 days after PCI with BMS, and 2.8% when NCS was performed more than 90 days after PCI with BMS. In univariate and multivariate analyses, a shorter time interval between PCI with BMS and noncardiac surgery was significantly associated with increased incidence of major adverse cardiac events (univariate: P < 0.001; odds ratio = 4.0; 95% confidence interval, 2.0-8.3; multivariate: P = 0.006; odds ratio = 3.2; 95% confidence interval, 1.5-6.9). Bleeding events were not associated with time between PCI with BMS and NCS or with the use of antiplatelet therapy in the week before NCS. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of major adverse cardiac events is lowest when NCS is performed at least 90 days after PCI with BMS.


Assuntos
Angioplastia Coronária com Balão/efeitos adversos , Stents/efeitos adversos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Operatórios/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Idoso , Perda Sanguínea Cirúrgica , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Metais , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Inibidores da Agregação Plaquetária/uso terapêutico , Estudos Retrospectivos , Risco , Fatores de Tempo
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...