No abstract

Background Anesthesiology residencies are developing trainee assessment tools to evaluate 25 milestones that map to the 6 core competencies. The effort will be facilitated by development of automated methods to capture, assess, and report trainee performance to program directors, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education and the trainees themselves. Methods We leveraged a perioperative information management system to develop an automated, near-real-time performance capture and feedback tool that provides objective data on clinical performance and requires minimal administrative effort. Prior to development, we surveyed trainees about satisfaction with clinical performance feedback and about preferences for future feedback. Results Resident performance on 24,154 completed cases has been incorporated into our automated dashboard, and trainees now have access to their own performance data. Eighty percent (48 of 60) of our residents responded to the feedback survey. Overall, residents ‘agreed/strongly agreed’ that they desire frequent updates on their clinical performance on defined quality metrics and that they desired to see how they compared to the residency as a whole. Prior to deployment of the new tool, they ‘disagreed’ that they were receiving feedback in a timely manner. Survey results were used to guide the format of the feedback tool that has been implemented. Conclusions We demonstrate the implementation of a system that provides near real-time feedback concerning resident performance on an extensible series of quality metrics, and which is responsive to requests arising from resident feedback about desired reporting mechanisms.

The developing elective schedule predicts final case volume weeks in advance. After implementation, overly high- or low-volume days are revealed in advance, allowing nursing, ancillary service, and anesthesia managers to proactively fine-tune staffing up or down to match demand.

BackgroundA major restructuring of perioperative care delivery is required to reduce cost while improving patient outcomes. In a test implementation of this notion, we developed and implemented a perioperative consult service (PCS) for colorectal surgery patients.MethodsA 6-month planning process was undertaken to engage key stakeholders from surgery, nursing, and anesthesia in a healthcare redesign project that resulted in the creation of a PCS to implement a coordinated clinical pathway. After Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, data were collected for all elective colorectal procedures for three phases: phase 0 (pre-implementation; 1/2014–6/2014), phase 1 (7/2014–10/2014), and phase 2 (11/2014–10/2015). Length of stay (primary endpoint; LOS), total hospital cost, use of clinical pathway components, markers of functional recovery, and readmission and reoperation rates were analyzed. Outcomes and patient characteristics among phases were compared by two-tailed t tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. Categorical variables were analyzed by chi-square and Fisher’s exact tests.ResultsWe studied 544 patients (phase 0 = 179; phase 1 = 124; phase 2 = 241), with 365 consecutive patients being cared for in the redesigned care structure. Median LOS was reduced and sustained after implementation (phase 0, 4.24 days; phase 1, 3.32 days; phase 2, 3.32 days, P < 0.01 phase 0 v. phases 1 and 2), and mean LOS was reduced in phase 2 (phase 0, 5.26 days; phase 1, 4.93 days; phase 2, 4.36 days, P < 0.01 phase 0 v. phase 2). Total hospital cost was reduced by 17 % (P = 0.05, median). Application of clinical pathway components was higher in phases 1 and 2 compared to phase 0 (P < 0.01 for all components except anti-emetics); measures of functional recovery improved with successive phases. Reoperation and 30-day readmission rates were no different in phase 1 or phase 2 compared to phase 0 (P > 0.15).ConclusionsRestructuring of perioperative care delivery through the launch of a PCS-reduced LOS and total cost in a significant and sustainable fashion for colorectal surgery patients. Based on the success of this care redesign project, hospital administration is funding expansion to additional services.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13741-016-0028-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The analgesic efficacy of a single dose of ketorolac or ibuprofen given preoperatively was assessed in healthy outpatients undergoing general anesthesia for laparoscopic tubal ligation. Fifty patients were randomized to receive either ketorolac 60 mg intravenously (i.v.), ibuprofen 800 mg orally, or placebo in a double-blind manner. Anesthesia was induced with fentanyl 2 micrograms/kg, thiopental 5 mg/kg, and either vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg or succinylcholine 1.5 mg/kg i.v. and was maintained with nitrous oxide 67% in oxygen and isoflurane. Patients were assessed at 15-min intervals in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and treated for pain with i.v. morphine by protocol. Patients were evaluated for pain, analgesic requirements, side effects, and recovery times. After discharge, patients completed questionnaires to assess pain, analgesic use, and side effects 6 and 24 h postoperatively. Parenteral morphine was required in 80% of patients in the control group, and 73% of patients in both treatment groups, and the difference was not statistically significant. The dose of parenteral morphine required in the PACU was not different between the control (7 +/- 1.2 mg), ibuprofen (5.7 +/- 1.4 mg), and ketorolac (6.1 +/- 1.4 mg) groups. There was no difference between groups in terms of pain visual analog scale (VAS) scores, fatigue VAS scores, recovery times, or the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The preoperative administration of either parenteral ketorolac or oral ibuprofen did not decrease postoperative pain or side effects when compared to placebo in this outpatient population.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract