Citations

Objective: In this study, we aim to develop and propose an evaluation method for analyzing the design of operating rooms (ORs) from the perspective of surgical teams’ reported experiences and stress levels. Background: Stress and burnout of surgical team members can lead to diminished performance and medical errors, which endangers the safety of both the patients and team members. The design and layout of the OR play a critical role in managing such stress. Methods: To understand surgical teams’ spatial needs related to their experiences and stress, we administered a survey and in-depth focus group discussions to three surgical teams from the same organization. The identified spatial needs were translated into functional scenarios and spatial metrics, essentially viewing the OR through the perspective of users. Results: Our analysis revealed four integral sections—patient flow, room organization, access to facilities/medical equipment/support staff/team members, and staff well-being—identified as critical design factors associated with the experiences and stress levels of the surgical teams in the ORs. Conclusions: We expect this method to serve as a tool for evaluating the effect of the design of OR layouts on stress, thereby supporting the well-being and resiliency of surgical teams.

Background Inconsistent nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques hinder scientific communication and engender confusion; this in turn has implications for research, education and clinical implementation of regional anesthesia. Having produced standardized nomenclature for abdominal wall, paraspinal and chest wall regional anesthetic techniques, we aimed to similarly do so for upper and lower limb peripheral nerve blocks. Methods We performed a three-round Delphi international consensus study to generate standardized names and anatomical descriptions of upper and lower limb regional anesthetic techniques. A long list of names and anatomical description of blocks of upper and lower extremities was produced by the members of the steering committee. Subsequently, two rounds of anonymized voting and commenting were followed by a third virtual round table to secure consensus for items that remained outstanding after the first and second rounds. As with previous methodology, strong consensus was defined as ≥75% agreement and weak consensus as 50%–74% agreement. Results A total of 94, 91 and 65 collaborators participated in the first, second and third rounds, respectively. We achieved strong consensus for 38 names and 33 anatomical descriptions, and weak consensus for five anatomical descriptions. We agreed on a template for naming peripheral nerve blocks based on the name of the nerve and the anatomical location of the blockade and identified several areas for future research. Conclusions We achieved consensus on nomenclature and anatomical descriptions of regional anesthetic techniques for upper and lower limb nerve blocks, and recommend using this framework in clinical and academic practice. This should improve research, teaching and learning of regional anesthesia to eventually improve patient care.

This cross-sectional study evaluates the consistency of US medical license renewal applications with the Federation of State Medical Boards recommendations for questions regarding physician mental health.

Case: A patient with prior left-sided brachial plexus trauma and associated left phrenic nerve paralysis subsequently developed transient respiratory failure after a contralateral supraclavicular nerve block. Her known left phrenic nerve palsy secondary to her index brachial plexus injury was rediscovered during the workup of her acute respiratory distress, which resulted in an emergent intensive care unit admission. Conclusion: The paralysis of her right phrenic nerve at the time of left-sided regional anesthesia was identified as the etiology of near-complete bilateral diaphragmatic paralysis and respiratory failure.

BACKGROUND: Retrospective and prospective studies 2 decades ago from the authors’ institution reported the incidence of perioperative ulnar neuropathy persisting for at least several months in a noncardiac adult surgical population to be between 30 and 40 per 100,000 cases. The aim of this project was to assess the incidence and explore risk factors for perioperative ulnar neuropathy in a recent cohort of patients from the same institution using a similar definition for ulnar neuropathy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective incidence and case-control study of all adults (≥18 years) undergoing noncardiac procedures with anesthesia services between 2011 and 2015. Each incident case of persistent ulnar neuropathy within 6 months of surgery was matched by age, sex, procedure date, and procedure type to 5 surgical patient controls. For the case-control study, separate conditional logistic regression analyses were performed to assess specific risk factors including the patient’s body position and arm position, as well as body mass index (BMI), surgical duration, and selected patient comorbidities. RESULTS: Persistent ulnar neuropathy of at least 2 months duration was found in 22 of 324,124 anesthetics for patients who underwent these procedures during the study period for an incidence rate of 6.8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.3-10.3) per 100,000 anesthetics. The incidence of ulnar neuropathy was higher in men compared to women (10.7 vs 3.0 per 100,000; P = .016). From the matched case-control study, the odds of ulnar neuropathy increased with higher BMI (odds ratio [OR] = 1.67 [1.16-2.42] per 5 kg/m 2 increase in BMI; P = .006), history of cancer (OR = 6.46 [1.64-25.49]; P = .008), longer procedures (OR = 1.53 [1.18-1.99] per hour; P = .001), and when 1 or both arms were tucked during surgery (OR = 6.16 [1.85-20.59]; P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of persistent perioperative ulnar neuropathy observed in this study was lower than the incidence reported 2 decades ago from the same institution and using a similar definition for ulnar neuropathy. Several of the previously reported risk factors continue to be associated with the development of persistent perioperative ulnar neuropathy, providing ongoing targets for practice changes that might further decrease the incidence of this problem.

Background. Critical limb ischemia (CLI) is limb pain occurring at rest or impending limb loss as a result of lack of blood flow to the affected extremity. CLI pain is challenging to control despite multimodal pharmacologic analgesia and surgical intervention. We described the successful use of a continuous local anesthetic infusion via a popliteal nerve catheter to control severe refractory ischemic lower limb pain in a patient who failed surgical intervention and performed a brief narrative literature review on regional anesthesia for ischemic pain.Case Presentation. A 74-year-old female with acute myelogenous leukemia presented with CLI after experiencing left popliteal artery occlusion. Palliative medicine service was consulted for pain management in the setting of escalating narcotic dose requirements. She experienced a complicated hospital course with several failed attempts at surgical revascularization due to arterial rethrombosis. In accordance with the patient’s goals of care, a continuous popliteal nerve catheter was placed, despite the high risk nature of an intervention in an immunocompromised patient with thrombocytopenia (platelet count of 30,000 platelets/microliter) and ongoing therapeutic anticoagulation. The patient experienced immediate relief while transitioning to comfort care.Conclusion. This is the first report of successful analgesia for CLI via a continuous popliteal catheter in a patient with rethrombosis and failed surgical revascularization. Based on our collaborative experience, we recommend the development of partnerships between the acute pain service and palliative care service to facilitate the early evaluation and decision to utilize regional anesthesia for treatment of CLI.