Summary Postoperative sore throat has a reported incidence of up to 62% following general anaesthesia. In adults undergoing tracheal intubation, female sex, younger age, pre‐existing lung disease, prolonged duration of anaesthesia and the presence of a blood‐stained tracheal tube on extubation are associated with the greatest risk. Tracheal intubation without neuromuscular blockade, use of double‐lumen tubes, as well as high tracheal tube cuff pressures may also increase the risk of postoperative sore throat. The expertise of the anaesthetist performing tracheal intubation appears to have no influence on the incidence in adults, although it may in children. In adults, the i‐gel™ supraglottic airway device results in a lower incidence of postoperative sore throat. Cuffed supraglottic airway devices should be inflated sufficiently to obtain an adequate seal and intracuff pressure should be monitored. Children with respiratory tract disease are at increased risk. The use of supraglottic airway devices, oral, rather than nasal, tracheal intubation and cuffed, rather than uncuffed, tracheal tubes have benefit in reducing the incidence of postoperative sore throat in children. Limiting both tracheal tube and supraglottic airway device cuff pressure may also reduce the incidence.

NHFS can be used to stratify the risk of 1 yr mortality after hip fracture surgery.

ISRCTN88284896.

Summary Guidelines are presented for safe practice in the use of intravenous drug infusions for general anaesthesia. When maintenance of general anaesthesia is by intravenous infusion, this is referred to as total intravenous anaesthesia. Although total intravenous anaesthesia has advantages for some patients, the commonest technique used for maintenance of anaesthesia in the UK and Ireland remains the administration of an inhaled volatile anaesthetic. However, the use of an inhalational technique is sometimes not possible, and in some situations, inhalational anaesthesia is contraindicated. Therefore, all anaesthetists should be able to deliver total intravenous anaesthesia competently and safely. For the purposes of simplicity, these guidelines will use the term total intravenous anaesthesia but also encompass techniques involving a combination of intravenous infusion and inhalational anaesthesia. This document is intended as a guideline for safe practice when total intravenous anaesthesia is being used, and not as a review of the pros and cons of total intravenous anaesthesia vs. inhalational anaesthesia in situations where both techniques are possible.

Summary The introduction of local anaesthesia some years after the first public demonstration of general anaesthesia not surprisingly created less excitement and interest amongst both the public and the medical profession. However, in its own way, a new revolution was happening. Local anaesthesia produced an increase in the choice of anaesthetic techniques available to practitioners and patients. In common with general anaesthesia, the choice of agents remained very limited for the first six decades, and interest in the practice of local, regional or central neuraxial blockade and the development of new techniques and drugs were hampered by perceived safety issues even as late as the second half of the 20th century. It is only in the last few years that, with an apparent renaissance in the use of local anaesthesia, the pace of development has picked up. As the use and range of techniques has increased, so has interest in solving some of the longstanding problems with the available drugs.

Summary Pulse oximetry is used widely to titrate oxygen therapy and for triage in patients who are critically ill. However, there are concerns regarding the accuracy of pulse oximetry in patients with COVID‐19 pneumonitis and in patients who have a greater degree of skin pigmentation. We aimed to determine the impact of patient ethnicity on the accuracy of peripheral pulse oximetry in patients who were critically ill with COVID‐19 pneumonitis by conducting a retrospective observational study comparing paired measurements of arterial oxygen saturation measured by co‐oximetry on arterial blood gas analysis (SaO 2 ) and the corresponding peripheral oxygenation saturation measured by pulse oximetry (S p O 2 ). Bias was calculated as the mean difference between SaO 2 and S p O 2 measurements and limits of agreement were calculated as bias ±1.96 SD. Data from 194 patients (135 White ethnic origin, 34 Asian ethnic origin, 19 Black ethnic origin and 6 other ethnic origin) were analysed consisting of 6216 paired SaO 2 and S p O 2 measurements. Bias (limits of agreement) between SaO 2 and S p O 2 measurements was 0.05% (−2.21–2.30). Patient ethnicity did not alter this to a clinically significant degree: 0.28% (1.79–2.35), −0.33% (−2.47–2.35) and −0.75% (−3.47–1.97) for patients of White, Asian and Black ethnic origin, respectively. In patients with COVID‐19 pneumonitis, S p O 2 measurements showed a level of agreement with SaO 2 values that was in line with previous work, and this was not affected by patient ethnicity.

: Although there are numerous publications addressing venous thromboembolism and its prevention in neurosurgery, there are relatively few high-quality studies to guide decisions regarding thromboprophylaxis. In patients undergoing craniotomy, we recommend that if intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) is used, it should be applied before the surgical procedure or on admission (Grade 1C). In craniotomy patients at particularly high risk for venous thromboembolism, we suggest considering the initiation of mechanical thromboprophylaxis with IPC preoperatively with addition of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) postoperatively when the risk of bleeding is presumed to be decreased (Grade 2C). In patients with non-traumatic intracranial haemorrhage, we suggest thromboprophylaxis with IPC (Grade 2C). For patients who have had non-traumatic intracranial haemorrhage, we suggest giving consideration to commencement of LMWH or low-dose unfractionated heparin when the risk of bleeding is presumed to be low (Grade 2C). We suggest continuing thromboprophylaxis until full mobilisation of the patient (Grade 2C). For patients undergoing spinal surgery with no additional risk factors, we suggest no active thromboprophylaxis intervention apart from early mobilisation (Grade 2C). For patients undergoing spinal surgery with additional risk factors, we recommend starting mechanical thromboprophylaxis with IPC (Grade 1C), and we suggest the addition of LMWH postoperatively when the risk of bleeding is presumed to be decreased (Grade 2C).

No abstract