Background Pulse oximetry is ubiquitous in anesthesia and is generally a reliable noninvasive measure of arterial oxygen saturation. Concerns regarding the impact of skin pigmentation and race/ethnicity on the accuracy of pulse oximeter accuracy exist. The authors hypothesized a greater prevalence of occult hypoxemia (arterial oxygen saturation [Sao2] less than 88% despite oxygen saturation measured by pulse oximetry [Spo2] greater than 92%) in patients undergoing anesthesia who self-reported a race/ethnicity other than White. Methods Demographic and physiologic data, including self-reported race/ethnicity, were extracted from a departmental data warehouse for patients receiving an anesthetic that included at least one arterial blood gas between January 2008 and December 2019. Calculated Sao2 values were paired with concurrent Spo2 values for each patient. Analysis to determine whether Black, Hispanic, Asian, or Other race/ethnicities were associated with occult hypoxemia relative to White race/ethnicity within the Spo2 range of 92 to 100% was completed. Results In total, 151,070 paired Sao2–Spo2 readings (70,722 White; 16,011 Black; 21,223 Hispanic; 8,121 Asian; 34,993 Other) from 46,253 unique patients were analyzed. The prevalence of occult hypoxemia was significantly higher in Black (339 of 16,011 [2.1%]) and Hispanic (383 of 21,223 [1.8%]) versus White (791 of 70,722 [1.1%]) paired Sao2–Spo2 readings (P < 0.001 for both). In the multivariable analysis, Black (odds ratio, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.11 to 1.87]; P = 0.006) and Hispanic (odds ratio, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.03 to 1.68]; P = 0.031) race/ethnicity were associated with occult hypoxemia. Asian and Other race/ethnicity were not associated with occult hypoxemia. Conclusions Self-reported Black and Hispanic race/ethnicity are associated with a greater prevalence of intraoperative occult hypoxemia in the Spo2 range of 92 to 100% when compared with self-reported White race/ethnicity. Editor’s Perspective What We Already Know about This Topic What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Background The incidence of cardiac arrests per year in the United States continues to increase, yet in-hospital cardiac arrest survival rates significantly vary between hospitals. Current methods of training are expensive, time consuming, and difficult to scale, which necessitates improvements in advanced cardiac life support (ACLS) training. Virtual reality (VR) has been proposed as an alternative or adjunct to high-fidelity simulation (HFS) in several environments. No evaluations to date have explored the ability of a VR program to examine both technical and behavioral skills and demonstrate a cost comparison. Objective This study aimed to explore the utility of a voice-based VR ACLS team leader refresher as compared with HFS. Methods This prospective observational study performed at an academic institution consisted of 25 postgraduate year 2 residents. Participants were randomized to HFS or VR training and then crossed groups after a 2-week washout. Participants were graded on technical and nontechnical skills. Participants also completed self-assessments about the modules. Proctors were assessed for fatigue and task saturation, and cost analysis based on local economic data was performed. Results A total of 23 of 25 participants were included in the scoring analysis. Fewer participants were familiar with VR compared with HFS (9/25, 36% vs 25/25, 100%; P<.001). Self-reported satisfaction and utilization scores were similar; however, significantly more participants felt HFS provided better feedback: 99 (IQR 89-100) vs 79 (IQR 71-88); P<.001. Technical scores were higher in the HFS group; however, nontechnical scores for decision making and communication were not significantly different between modalities. VR sessions were 21 (IQR 19-24) min shorter than HFS sessions, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration task load index scores for proctors were lower in each category, and VR sessions were estimated to be US $103.68 less expensive in a single-learner, single-session model. Conclusions Utilization of a VR-based team leader refresher for ACLS skills is comparable with HFS in several areas, including learner satisfaction. The VR module was more cost-effective and was easier to proctor; however, HFS was better at delivering feedback to participants. Optimal education strategies likely contain elements of both modalities. Further studies are needed to examine the utility of VR-based environments at scale.

Virtual warm-up significantly improved performance by residents of FOI in live patients with normal airway anatomy, as measured both by speed and by a scaled evaluation of skills.

BACKGROUND: Numerous barrier devices have recently been developed and rapidly deployed worldwide in an effort to protect health care workers (HCWs) from exposure to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) during high-risk procedures. However, only a few studies have examined their impact on the dispersion of droplets and aerosols, which are both thought to be significant contributors to the spread of COVID-19. METHODS: Two commonly used barrier devices, an intubation box and a clear plastic intubation sheet, were evaluated using a physiologically accurate cough simulator. Aerosols were modeled using a commercially available fog machine, and droplets were modeled with fluorescein dye. Both particles were propelled by the cough simulator in a simulated intubation environment. Data were captured by high-speed flash photography, and aerosol and droplet dispersion were assessed qualitatively with and without a barrier in place. RESULTS: Droplet contamination after a simulated cough was seemingly contained by both barrier devices. Simulated aerosol escaped the barriers and flowed toward the head of the bed. During barrier removal, simulated aerosol trapped underneath was released and propelled toward the HCW at the head of the bed. Usage of the intubation sheet concentrated droplets onto a smaller area. If no barrier was used, positioning the patient in slight reverse Trendelenburg directed aerosols away from the HCW located at the head of the bed. CONCLUSIONS: Our observations imply that intubation boxes and sheets may reduce HCW exposure to droplets, but they both may merely redirect aerosolized particles, potentially resulting in increased exposure to aerosols in certain circumstances. Aerosols may remain within the barrier device after a cough, and manipulation of the box may release them. Patients should be positioned to facilitate intubation, but slight reverse Trendelenburg may direct infectious aerosols away from the HCW. Novel barrier devices should be used with caution, and further validation studies are necessary.

No abstract