Marie-Pierre Bonnet , Perrine Guckert , Cécile Boccara , Chafia Daoui , Hélène Beloeil , on behalf of the SFAR research network
{"title":"New set of indicators with consensus definition for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity: A scoping review followed by a Delphi study","authors":"Marie-Pierre Bonnet , Perrine Guckert , Cécile Boccara , Chafia Daoui , Hélène Beloeil , on behalf of the SFAR research network","doi":"10.1016/j.jclinane.2024.111626","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Study objective</h3><p>Monitoring anaesthesia-related severe morbidity constitutes a good opportunity for assessing quality and safety of care in anaesthesia. Several recent studies attempted to describe and define indicators for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity with limitations: no formal experts' consensus process, overlap with surgical complications, no consensual definitions, inapplicability in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to provide a set of indicators for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity based on outcomes and using clinically useful consensual definitions.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>1/ scoping review of studies published in 2010–2021 on outcomes of anaesthesia-related severe morbidity with different definitions;</p><p>2/ International experts' consensus on indicators for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity with specific definitions using a Delphi process.</p></div><div><h3>Main results</h3><p>After including 142 studies, 68 outcomes for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity were identified and organized in 34 indicators divided into 8 categories (cardiovascular, respiratory, sepsis, renal, neurological, medication error, digestive and others). The indicators were then submitted to the experts. After 2 Delphi rounds, the 26 indicators retained by the experts with their corresponding consensual definition were: acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary embolism and thrombosis, bronchospasm or laryngospasm, pneumonia, inhalation pneumonitis, pneumothorax, difficult or impossible intubation, atelectasis, self-extubation or accidental extubation, sepsis or septic shock, transient ischemic attack, postoperative confusion or delirium, post-puncture headache, medication error, liver failure, unplanned intensive care unit admission, multiple-organ failure.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study provides a new consensual set of indicators for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity with specific definitions, that could be easily applied in clinical practice as in research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":15506,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","volume":"99 ","pages":"Article 111626"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952818024002551/pdfft?md5=be8df1715f6454db5d6d33e288b2039a&pid=1-s2.0-S0952818024002551-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0952818024002551","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Study objective
Monitoring anaesthesia-related severe morbidity constitutes a good opportunity for assessing quality and safety of care in anaesthesia. Several recent studies attempted to describe and define indicators for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity with limitations: no formal experts' consensus process, overlap with surgical complications, no consensual definitions, inapplicability in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to provide a set of indicators for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity based on outcomes and using clinically useful consensual definitions.
Design
1/ scoping review of studies published in 2010–2021 on outcomes of anaesthesia-related severe morbidity with different definitions;
2/ International experts' consensus on indicators for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity with specific definitions using a Delphi process.
Main results
After including 142 studies, 68 outcomes for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity were identified and organized in 34 indicators divided into 8 categories (cardiovascular, respiratory, sepsis, renal, neurological, medication error, digestive and others). The indicators were then submitted to the experts. After 2 Delphi rounds, the 26 indicators retained by the experts with their corresponding consensual definition were: acute heart failure, cardiogenic shock, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary embolism and thrombosis, bronchospasm or laryngospasm, pneumonia, inhalation pneumonitis, pneumothorax, difficult or impossible intubation, atelectasis, self-extubation or accidental extubation, sepsis or septic shock, transient ischemic attack, postoperative confusion or delirium, post-puncture headache, medication error, liver failure, unplanned intensive care unit admission, multiple-organ failure.
Conclusions
This study provides a new consensual set of indicators for anaesthesia-related severe morbidity with specific definitions, that could be easily applied in clinical practice as in research.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Clinical Anesthesia (JCA) addresses all aspects of anesthesia practice, including anesthetic administration, pharmacokinetics, preoperative and postoperative considerations, coexisting disease and other complicating factors, cost issues, and similar concerns anesthesiologists contend with daily. Exceptionally high standards of presentation and accuracy are maintained.
The core of the journal is original contributions on subjects relevant to clinical practice, and rigorously peer-reviewed. Highly respected international experts have joined together to form the Editorial Board, sharing their years of experience and clinical expertise. Specialized section editors cover the various subspecialties within the field. To keep your practical clinical skills current, the journal bridges the gap between the laboratory and the clinical practice of anesthesiology and critical care to clarify how new insights can improve daily practice.