Citations

BACKGROUND: Although there has been a considerable increase in the representation of women in medicine, a gender gap still exists with regard to leadership positions. This gender discrepancy has been identified in the field of anesthesiology, in terms of first and senior authorship, as well as in general composition of editorial boards in Anesthesiology and Anesthesia & Analgesia . The goal of this study is to examine the current representation of women in editorial boards of anesthesia journals with respect to the hierarchy of different editorial positions and to assess whether there has been improvement toward equity in recent years. METHODS: A comprehensive search was performed for anesthesiology journals indexed in the Scimago Journal and Country Rank in May 2020. The editorial boards of the top 20 journals by impact factor were analyzed. Editorial board members were categorized based on their title. Gender was assigned using images or pronouns on research databases or hospital-affiliated websites. The percentage of women within each category was calculated. When available, the year the editors obtained their medical degree was collected. A binomial proportion test was used to analyze the distribution of women overall and among editorial roles, compared to the proportion of women anesthesiologists (26%). A Wilcoxon rank-sum test was used to compare time since medical degree between genders. Additionally, women representation in anesthesiology editorial boards in 2020 was compared to 2010. RESULTS: A total of 19 journals were included in this study, as 1 journal did not disclose editorial board membership. Overall, women occupied 18% of all editorial board positions. All editors-in-chief and assistant/associate/deputy editors-in-chief were men. Women consisted of 17.1% of executive/section/senior editors, 17.9% of editors, and 20.6% of associate/assistant editors. There were significantly fewer women editorial board members than the percentage of women anesthesiologists (18% vs 26%; P < .001). Editorial boards from 2010 were available for 14 journals, and of these journals, women comprised 12% of editorial board members in 2010 compared to 19% in 2020 ( P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that in anesthesiology journals, women are underrepresented at all editorial levels, especially at higher levels. As editorial boards have a significant impact on which articles are published by a journal and thereby significant influence on the specialty as a whole, the lack of gender equity in editorial boards should be addressed.

Background: The modern scalp block consists of local anesthesia injections that target the supraorbital, supratrochlear, zygomaticotemporal, auriculotemporal, and greater and lesser occipital nerves. Limited data exist on the local anesthetic spread that occurs with this technique. This study examines the extent of the spread of a scalp block using methylene blue in a cadaveric model. Methods: A traditional landmark-based scalp block was performed on 6 unembalmed human cadavers using 25-G, 1.5-inch needles to inject 1 to 2 mL of methylene blue 0.1% at each nerve bilaterally; a total volume of 20 mL was injected. The cadavers were then dissected, and the spread of injectate was measured and recorded. Results: All the nerves required for analgesic coverage were appropriately stained by the injections, except for in 2 specimens where the lesser occipital nerve could not be identified. The zygomatic (stained in 2 of 8 specimens) and temporal (stained in 5 of 8 specimens) branches of the facial nerve were stained as a result of the zygomaticotemporal and/or auriculotemporal injections. Tracking from the zygomatic injection site was noted as far inferior as the temporalis muscle attachments on the mandible. Conclusions: This cadaveric study confirms that the landmark-based technique for scalp blocks consistently stained all 6 nerves involved in scalp innervation. There was significant unintentional spread to the branches of the facial nerve when using the landmark technique.

Psychotropic drugs are used in the treatment of psychiatric and non-psychiatric conditions. Many patients who are on psychotropic medications may present for procedures requiring anesthesia. Psychotropic medications can have dangerous interactions with drugs commonly used in anesthesia, some of which can be life-threatening. In this review, we describe the current anesthetic considerations for patients on psychotropic drug therapies, including antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, anxiolytics, and stimulants. The pharmacology, side effects, and potential drug interactions of the commonly prescribed psychotropic drug therapies with anesthetic agents are described. Further, we highlight the current recommendations regarding the cessation and continuation of these medications during the perioperative period.

Purpose of review Although patient safety is a core component of education in anesthesiology, approaches to implementation of education programs are less well defined. The goal of this review is to describe the current state of education in anesthesia patient safety and the ideal patient safety curriculum. Recent findings Anesthesiology has been a pioneer in patient safety for decades, with efforts amongst national organizations, such as the American Society of Anesthesiologists and the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation to disseminate key standards and guidelines in patient safety. However, few, if any strategies for implementation of a patient safety curriculum in anesthesiology exist. Summary Patient safety education is crucial to the field of anesthesiology, particularly with the advancement of surgical and anesthesia technologies and increasing complexity of patients and procedures. The ideal patient safety curriculum in anesthesiology consists of simulation, adverse event investigation and analysis, and participation in process improvement. Efforts in education must adapt with changing technology, shifts in the way anesthesia care is delivered, and threats to physician wellness. Future efforts in education should harness emerging platforms, such as social media, podcasts, and wikis.

AbstractBackgroundPatients undergoing kidney transplantation traditionally receive liberal amounts of fluid during surgery. However, excessive fluids can lead to fluid overload and ileus. In this retrospective cohort study, we compared the effect of restrictive versus liberal fluid therapy on kidney transplantation outcomes.MethodsPatients who underwent deceased‐donor kidney transplantation at Mayo Clinic from January 2014 to March 2019 were included. Those who received <3 L of intravenous fluids intraoperatively were categorized as “restrictive;” those who received ≥3 L were categorized as “liberal.” The primary outcome was incidence of delayed graft function (DGF). Secondary outcomes included length of stay, readmission within 30 days, time to return of bowel function, and incidence of postoperative complications.ResultsOf the 1171 patients included, 557 were in the restrictive group and 614 in the liberal group. The mean (SD) fluid intake was 2.17 (.54) L in the restrictive group and 3.67 (.68) L in the liberal group (P<.001). There was no difference in DGF (relative risk, 1.03; P = .56), length of stay (P = .34), readmission (P = .80), return of bowel function (P = .71), or other postoperative complications.ConclusionsIntraoperative restrictive fluid therapy during kidney transplantation was not associated with DGF or worse outcomes when compared with liberal fluid therapy.

Diabetes insipidus (DI) is an uncommon perioperative complication that can occur secondary to medications or surgical manipulation and can cause significant hypovolemia and electrolyte abnormalities. We reviewed and evaluated the current literature and identified 29 cases of DI related to medications commonly used in anesthesia such as propofol, dexmedetomidine, sevoflurane, ketamine, and opioids. This review summarizes the case reports and frequency of DI with each medication and presents possible pathophysiology. Medication-induced DI should be included in the differential diagnosis when intraoperative polyuria is identified. Early identification, removal of the agent, and treatment of intraoperative DI are critical to minimize complications.

Background and objectives The costoclavicular brachial plexus block is performed deep and posterior to the midpoint of the clavicle. There are limited data evaluating the spread of the costoclavicular brachial plexus block. We performed a cadaveric study to evaluate the spread of injectate after a costoclavicular brachial plexus block. Methods Five ultrasound-guided costoclavicular block injections were performed with 20 mL of 0.1% methylene blue. The brachial plexus and its branches were dissected from the level of C4 to the lower axilla. The extent of dye spread was recorded including spread to the phrenic nerve, suprascapular nerve, roots, trunks, divisions, cords and terminal branches of the brachial plexus. Results The dye extended cephalad to the level of the cricoid cartilage in two of the five injections; three injections had dye extending 0.75 cm, 1.5 cm and 2 cm caudad to the level of the cricoid cartilage, respectively. The C7, C8 and T1 nerve roots were stained in all injections. The dye did not extend cephalad to the C5 and C6 nerve roots. All trunks, cords and divisions of the brachial plexus were stained, as was the suprascapular nerve. There was no spread of dye to the phrenic nerve in any of the specimens. Conclusions This cadaveric study demonstrates that ultrasound-guided injection in the costoclavicular space spreads cephalad to the brachial plexus in the supraclavicular space, consistently reaching the suprascapular nerve and all trunks and cords of the brachial plexus, while sparing the phrenic nerve.

Background and objectives The erector spinae plane (ESP) block is a relatively new interfascial block technique. Previous cadaveric studies have shown extensive cephalocaudal spread with a single ESP injection at the thoracic level. However, little data exist for lumbar ESP block. The objective of this study was to examine the anatomical spread of dye following an ultrasound-guided lumbar ESP block in a human cadaveric model. Methods An ultrasound-guided ESP block was performed in unembalmed human cadavers using an in-plane approach with a curvilinear transducer oriented longitudinally. 20 mL of 0.166% methylene blue was injected into the plane between the distal end of the L4 transverse process and erector spinae muscle bilaterally in four specimens and unilaterally in one specimen (nine ESP blocks in total). The superficial and deep back muscles were dissected, and the extent of dye spread was documented in both cephalocaudal and medial–lateral directions. Results There was cephalocaudal spread from L3 to L5 in all specimens with extension to L2 in four specimens. Medial–lateral spread was documented from the multifidus muscle to the lateral edge of the thoracolumbar fascia. There was extensive dye in and around the erector spinae musculature and spread to the dorsal rami in all specimens. There was no dye spread anteriorly into the dorsal root ganglion, ventral rami, or paravertebral space. Conclusions A lumbar ESP injection has limited craniocaudal spread compared with injection in the thoracic region. It has consistent spread to dorsal rami, but no anterior spread to ventral rami or paravertebral space.

Purpose Despite increasing emphasis in medical school education on quality and systems improvement, many medical schools lack sufficient faculty with expertise to teach systems improvement. Using the pedagogical content knowledge framework, this study explores how faculty engage students in systems improvement work and faculty perceptions of the outcomes for the health system and students. Method In May–June 2017, the authors interviewed 12 of 13 invited faculty with experience in teaching and engaging first-year medical students in systems improvement work, the course of students’ systems improvement work over time, the impact of students’ projects on health systems, and students’ learning and attitudes about systems improvement. The authors conducted qualitative analysis iteratively with data collection to sufficiency. Results Six emergent themes characterized faculty’s approach to guiding students in systems improvement work: faculty–student relationship, faculty role, student role, faculty–student shared responsibility for projects, faculty and student content knowledge, and project outcomes. The faculty–student relationship was foundational for successful systems improvement work. Faculty roles included project selection, project management, and health systems interactions. Students engaged in systems improvement as their faculty leveraged their knowledge and skills and created meaningful student roles. Faculty and students shared responsibility and colearned systems improvement content knowledge. Faculty defined successful outcomes as students’ learning about the systems improvement process and interprofessional collaboration. Conclusions Findings highlight the critical importance of pedagogical content knowledge to engage early learners in systems improvement work, understand their learning interests and needs, and manage their projects longitudinally.