Capnography-An Essential Monitor, Everywhere: A Narrative Review.

Capnography is now recognized as an indispensable patient safety monitor. Evidence suggests that its use improves outcomes in operating rooms, intensive care units, and emergency departments, as well as in sedation suites, in postanesthesia recovery units, and on general postsurgical wards. Capnography can accurately and rapidly detect respiratory, circulatory, and metabolic derangements. In addition to being useful for diagnosing and managing esophageal intubation, capnography provides crucial information when used for monitoring airway patency and hypoventilation in patients without instrumented airways. Despite its ubiquitous use in high-income-country operating rooms, deaths from esophageal intubations continue to occur in these contexts due to incorrect use or interpretation of capnography. National and international society guidelines on airway management mandate capnography's use during intubations across all hospital areas, and recommend it when ventilation may be impaired, such as during procedural sedation. Nevertheless, capnography's use across high-income-country intensive care units, emergency departments, and postanesthesia recovery units remains inconsistent. While capnography is universally used in high-income-country operating rooms, it remains largely unavailable to anesthesia providers in low- and middle-income countries. This lack of access to capnography likely contributes to more frequent and serious airway events and higher rates of perioperative mortality in low- and middle-income countries. New capnography equipment, which overcomes cost and context barriers, has recently been developed. Increasing access to capnography in low- and middle-income countries must occur to improve patient outcomes and expand universal health care. It is time to extend capnography's safety benefits to all patients, everywhere.

European standard internal telephone number 2222 for in-hospital emergency calls: A national survey in all French military training hospitals.

Background: In 2016, three European scientific societies called for standardization to the "2222" as a European unique phone number in case of in-hospital emergencies. This study describes the management of in-hospital emergency calls in all French military training hospitals and aims to detail their original transition, for the first time in France, to the "2222". Methods: An electronic standardized questionnaire was emailed to heads of rapid response teams in the eight French military training hospitals. Results: All participants answered the questionnaire (100%). The eight French military training hospitals had a specific procedure for management of in-hospital emergencies. Six hospitals already used a unique phone number for in-hospital emergencies, but none of them were using the 2222 in March 2019. Two hospitals still used several phone numbers for in-hospital emergencies, mainly due to historical and local arrangements. Rapid response teams included at least a physician and a nurse. There was a discussion to switch to "2222" as the unique phone number for in-hospital emergencies in two hospitals. In both, the discussions involved hospital executive officers, medical teams, rapid response teams and technical teams leading to a step-by-step transition. Finally, in October 2019, these two hospitals launched the "2222" procedure for in-hospital emergencies. Conclusion: This study found a large disparity in the eight French military training hospitals, concerning in-hospital emergency protocols. Two French military training hospitals launched the "2222" procedure for the first time in France. Further efforts are still needed to continue to promote the use of the 2222 as a European unique phone number for in-hospital emergencies.

Ten years of the Helsinki Declaration on patient safety in anaesthesiology: An expert opinion on peri-operative safety aspects.

: Patient safety is an activity to mitigate preventable patient harm that may occur during the delivery of medical care. The European Board of Anaesthesiology (EBA)/European Union of Medical Specialists had previously published safety recommendations on minimal monitoring and postanaesthesia care, but with the growing public and professional interest it was decided to produce a much more encompassing document. The EBA and the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) published a consensus on what needs to be done/achieved for improvement of peri-operative patient safety. During the Euroanaesthesia meeting in Helsinki/Finland in 2010, this vision was presented to anaesthesiologists, patients, industry and others involved in health care as the 'Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology'. In May/June 2020, ESA and EBA are celebrating the 10th anniversary of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology; a good opportunity to look back and forward evaluating what was achieved in the recent 10 years, and what needs to be done in the upcoming years. The Patient Safety and Quality Committee (PSQC) of ESA invited experts in their fields to contribute, and these experts addressed their topic in different ways; there are classical, narrative reviews, more systematic reviews, political statements, personal opinions and also original data presentation. With this publication we hope to further stimulate implementation of the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology, as well as initiating relevant research in the future.

Clinical and economic burden of procedural sedation-related adverse events and their outcomes: analysis from five countries.

BACKGROUND: Studies have reported on the incidence of sedation-related adverse events (AEs), but little is known about their impact on health care costs and resource use. METHODS: Health care providers and payers in five countries were recruited for an online survey by independent administrators to ensure that investigators and respondents were blinded to each other. Surveys were conducted in the local language and began with a "screener" to ensure that respondents had relevant expertise and experience. Responses were analyzed using Excel and R, with the Dixon's Q statistic used to identify and remove outliers. Global and country-specific average treatment patterns were calculated via bootstrapping; costs were mean values. The sum product of costs and intervention probability gave a cost per AE. RESULTS: Responses were received from 101 providers and 26 payers, the majority having >5 years of experience. At a minimum, the respondents performed a total of 3,430 procedural sedations per month. All AEs detailed occurred in clinical practice in the last year and were reported to cause procedural delays and cancellations in some patients. Standard procedural sedation costs ranged from €74 (Germany) to $2,300 (US). Respondents estimated that AEs would increase costs by between 16% (Italy) and 179% (US). Hypotension was reported as the most commonly observed AE with an associated global mean cost (interquartile range) of $43 ($27-$68). Other frequent AEs, including mild hypotension, bradycardia, tachycardia, mild oxygen desaturation, hypertension, and brief apnea, were estimated to increase health care spending on procedural sedation by $2.2 billion annually in the US. CONCLUSION: All sedation-related AEs can increase health care costs and result in substantial delays or cancellations of subsequent procedures. The prevention of even minor AEs during procedural sedation may be crucial to ensuring its value as a health care service.

Improving detection of patient deterioration in the general hospital ward environment.

: Patient monitoring on low acuity general hospital wards is currently based largely on intermittent observations and measurements of simple variables, such as blood pressure and temperature, by nursing staff. Often several hours can pass between such measurements and patient deterioration can go unnoticed. Moreover, the integration and interpretation of the information gleaned through these measurements remains highly dependent on clinical judgement. More intensive monitoring, which is commonly used in peri-operative and intensive care settings, is more likely to lead to the early identification of patients who are developing complications than is intermittent monitoring. Early identification can trigger appropriate management, thereby reducing the need for higher acuity care, reducing hospital lengths of stay and admission costs and even, at times, improving survival. However, this degree of monitoring has thus far been considered largely inappropriate for general hospital ward settings due to device costs and the need for staff expertise in data interpretation. In this review, we discuss some developing options to improve patient monitoring and thus detection of deterioration in low acuity general hospital wards.

Capnography standards for outside the operating room.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Standards for capnography inside operating theatres in high and middle-income countries are well recognized and implemented. This review examines recent standards and recommendations for the use of capnography outside the operating room and their rationale and development. RECENT FINDINGS: The landmark publication of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and Difficult Airway Society's National Audit Project 4 report provided compelling evidence of airway deaths and a significant patient harm occurring outside the operating room, particularly in ICUs and to a lesser extent in emergency departments. Up to 74% of these ICU deaths could have been prevented by capnography. This provided a serious wake up call for relevant clinicians. As a result, there have recently been new standards published for the use of capnography in these and other areas of the hospital. Waveform capnography can also reflect cardiac output, as the 2015 resuscitation guidelines emphasized. Work still needs to be done on implementing all of these new standards. SUMMARY: Established standards for using capnography within the operating theatre have significantly improved patient safety and it is hoped that the recent publication of new but similar capnography standards for application outside the operating theatre will do the same there. The reasons for the current low levels of implementation of some of these standards outside the operating room are worthy of further research.

The Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology: putting words into practice.

In June 2010, the European Board of Anaesthesiology (EBA) of the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS) and the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA) signed the Helsinki Declaration for Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology at the Euroanaesthesia meeting in Helsinki. The document had been jointly prepared by these two principal anaesthesiology organisations in Europe who pledged to improve the safety of patients being cared for by anaesthesiologists working in the medical fields of perioperative care, intensive care medicine, emergency medicine and pain medicine. The declaration stated their current heads of agreement on patient safety and listed a number of principle requirements as thought necessary for anaesthesiologists, anaesthesiology departments and institutions to introduce to improve patient safety. Good words are only as good as their implementation and this article explains the rationale behind them and expands the recommendations practically so anaesthesiologists caring for patients everywhere can follow the Helsinki Declaration and put the words into practice.

The Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology.

Anaesthesiology, which includes anaesthesia, perioperative care, intensive care medicine, pain therapy and emergency medicine, has always participated in systematic attempts to improve patient safety. Anaesthesiologists have a unique, cross-specialty opportunity to influence the safety and quality of patient care. Past achievements have allowed our specialty a perception that it has become safe, but there should be no room for complacency when there is more to be done. Increasingly older and sicker patients, more complex surgical interventions, more pressure on throughput, new drugs and devices and simple chance all pose hazards in the work of anaesthesiologists. In response to this increasingly difficult and complex working environment, the European Board of Anaesthesiology (EBA), in cooperation with the European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESA), has produced a blueprint for patient safety in anaesthesiology. This document, to be known as the Helsinki Declaration on Patient Safety in Anaesthesiology, was endorsed by these two bodies together with the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA), and the European Patients' Federation (EPF) at the Euroanaesthesia meeting in Helsinki in June 2010. The Declaration represents a shared European view of that which is worthy, achievable, and needed to improve patient safety in anaesthesiology in 2010. The Declaration recommends practical steps that all anaesthesiologists who are not already using them can successfully include in their own clinical practice. In parallel, EBA and ESA have launched a joint patient safety task-force in order to put these recommendations into practice. It is planned to review this Declaration document regularly.