The National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry

Data Science and Geriatric Anesthesia Research: Opportunity and Challenges

With an increase in geriatric population undergoing surgical procedures, research focused on enhancing their perioperative outcomes is of paramount importance. Currently, most of the evidence-based medicine protocols are driven by studies concentrating on adults encompassing all adult age groups. Given the alterations in physiology with aging, geriatric patients respond differently to anesthetics and, therefore, require specific research initiatives to further expound on the same. Large databases and the development of sophisticated analytic tools can provide meaningful insights into this. Here, we discuss a few research opportunities and challenges that data scientists face when focusing on geriatric perioperative research.

Anesthesia Quality Improvement: Current State and Future Opportunities

Continuous improvement of quality and safety is a professional obligation of anesthesiologists and an ongoing activity of all academic departments and private practices. Quality improvement is an infinite process that is never fully complete but that instead evolves over time in response to emerging threats to patient safety from new medications, new surgical procedures, and increased recognition of systematic threats. This review discusses current definitions and thinking in anesthesia quality improvement, outlines recommended efforts at the local department level, and makes suggestions for the projects and activities most likely to benefit the anesthesia patients and clinicians of the future.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Regional Anesthesia: A Brief Review

Disparities in regional anesthesia may limit patients' access to appropriate care. We reviewed literature from 2013 to 2023 regarding health disparities in regional anesthesia. While there were some exceptions, patients belonging to racial/ethnic minority groups and those with lower socioeconomic status did not receive regional anesthesia as frequently as their White or higher-income peers. As regional anesthesia continues to emerge as a preferred method of managing chronic pain conditions and providing surgical anesthesia, it is essential to ensure that it is provided equitably across the patient population.

Anesthetic Choice for Percutaneous Transcatheter Closure of the Left Atrial Appendage: A National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry Analysis

CONTEXT

Left atrial appendage closure (LAAC) was developed as a novel stroke prevention alternative for patients with atrial fibrillation, particularly for those not suitable for long-term oral anticoagulant therapy. Traditionally, general anesthesia (GA) has been more commonly used primarily due to the necessity of transesophageal echocardiography.

AIMS

Compare trends of monitored anesthesia care (MAC) versus GA for percutaneous transcatheter LAAC with endocardial implant and assess for independent variables associated with primary anesthetic choice.

SETTINGS AND DESIGN

Multi-institutional data collected from across the United States using the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective data analysis from 2017-2021.

STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED

Independent-sample t tests or Mann-Whitney U tests were used for continuous variables and Chi-square tests or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess patient and hospital characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 19,395 patients underwent the procedure, and 352 patients (1.8%) received MAC. MAC usage trended upward from 2017-2021 (P < 0.0001). MAC patients were more likely to have an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status of≥ 4 (33.6% vs 22.89%) and to have been treated at centers in the South (67.7% vs 44.2%), in rural locations (71% vs 39.5%), and with lower median annual percutaneous transcatheter LAAC volume (102 vs 153 procedures) (all P < 0.0001). In multivariate analysis, patients treated in the West had 85% lower odds of receiving MAC compared to those in the Northeast (AOR: 0.15; 95% CI 0.03-0.80, P = 0.0261).

CONCLUSIONS

While GA is the most common anesthetic technique for percutaneous transcatheter closure of the left atrial appendage, a small, statistically significant increase in MAC occurred from 2017-2021. Anesthetic management for LAAC varies with geographic location.

INSPIRE, a publicly available research dataset for perioperative medicine

We present the INSPIRE dataset, a publicly available research dataset in perioperative medicine, which includes approximately 130,000 surgical operations at an academic institution in South Korea over a ten-year period between 2011 and 2020. This comprehensive dataset includes patient characteristics such as age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification, diagnosis, surgical procedure code, department, and type of anaesthesia. The dataset also includes vital signs in the operating theatre, general wards, and intensive care units (ICUs), laboratory results from six months before admission to six months after discharge, and medication during hospitalisation. Complications include total hospital and ICU length of stay and in-hospital death. We hope this dataset will inspire collaborative research and development in perioperative medicine and serve as a reproducible external validation dataset to improve surgical outcomes.

Anesthetic Management for Ventricular Tachycardia Ablation: A National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry Analysis

OBJECTIVES

The authors analyzed anesthetic management trends during ventricular tachycardia (VT) ablation, hypothesizing that (1) monitored anesthesia care (MAC) is more commonly used than general anesthesia (GA); (2) MAC uses significantly increased after release of the 2019 Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias; and (3) anesthetic approach varies based on patient and hospital characteristics.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients 18 years or older who underwent elective VT ablation between 2013 and 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Covariates were selected a priori within multivariate models, and interrupted time-series analysis was performed. Of the 15,505 patients who underwent VT ablation between 2013 and 2021, 9,790 (63.1%) received GA. After the 2019 Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias supported avoidance of GA in idiopathic VT, no statistically significant increase in MAC was evident (immediate change in intercept post-consensus statement release adjusted odds ratio 1.41, p = 0.1629; change in slope post-consensus statement release adjusted odds ratio 1.06 per quarter, p = 0.1591). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, age, and geographic location were statistically significantly associated with the anesthetic approach.

CONCLUSIONS

GA has remained the primary anesthetic type for VT ablation despite the 2019 Expert Consensus Statement on Catheter Ablation of Ventricular Arrhythmias suggested its avoidance in idiopathic VT. Achieving widespread clinical practice change is an ongoing challenge in medicine, emphasizing the importance of developing effective implementation strategies to facilitate awareness of guideline release and subsequent adherence to and adoption of recommendations.

Anesthetic Choice for Cardiovascular Implantable Electronic Device Placement and Lead Removal: A National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The authors evaluated the anesthetic approach for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED) placement and transvenous lead removal, hypothesizing that monitored anesthesia care is used more frequently than general anesthesia.

DESIGN

A retrospective study.

SETTING

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients who underwent CIED (permanent cardiac pacemaker or implantable cardioverter-defibrillator [ICD]) placement or transvenous lead removal between 2010 and 2021.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Covariates were selected a priori within multivariate models to assess predictors of anesthetic type. A total of 87,530 patients underwent pacemaker placement, 76,140 had ICD placement, 2,568 had pacemaker transvenous lead removal, and 4,861 had ICD transvenous lead extraction; 51.2%, 45.64%, 16.82%, and 45.64% received monitored anesthesia care, respectively. A 2%, 1% (both p < 0.0001), and 2% (p = 0.0003) increase in monitored anesthesia care occurred for each 1-year increase in age for pacemaker placement, ICD placement, and pacemaker transvenous lead removal, respectively. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status ≤III for pacemaker placement, ASA ≥IV for ICD placement, and ASA ≤III for pacemaker transvenous lead removal were 7% (p = 0.0013), 5% (p = 0.0144), and 27% (p = 0.0247) more likely to receive monitored anesthesia care, respectively. Patients treated in the Northeast were more likely to receive monitored anesthesia care than in the West for all groups analyzed (p < 0.0024). Male patients were 24% less likely to receive monitored anesthesia care for pacemaker transvenous lead removal (p = 0.0378). For every additional 10 pacemaker or ICD lead removals performed in a year, a 2% decrease in monitored anesthesia care was evident (p = 0.0271, p < 0.0001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

General anesthesia still has a strong presence in the anesthetic management of both CIED placement and transvenous lead removal. Anesthetic choice, however, varies with patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and geographic region.

Data Science and Geriatric Anesthesia Research: Opportunity and Challenges

With an increase in geriatric population undergoing surgical procedures, research focused on enhancing their perioperative outcomes is of paramount importance. Currently, most of the evidence-based medicine protocols are driven by studies concentrating on adults encompassing all adult age groups. Given the alterations in physiology with aging, geriatric patients respond differently to anesthetics and, therefore, require specific research initiatives to further expound on the same. Large databases and the development of sophisticated analytic tools can provide meaningful insights into this. Here, we discuss a few research opportunities and challenges that data scientists face when focusing on geriatric perioperative research.

Anesthetic choice for arteriovenous access creation: A National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry analysis

BACKGROUND

We sought to evaluate differences in primary anesthetic type used in arteriovenous access creation with the hypothesis that administration of regional anesthesia and monitored anesthesia care (MAC) with local anesthesia as the primary anesthetic has increased over time.

METHODS

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data were retrospectively evaluated. Covariates were selected a priori within multivariate models to determine predictors of anesthetic type in adults who underwent elective arteriovenous access creation between 2010 and 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 144,392 patients met criteria; 90,741 (62.8%) received general anesthesia. The use of regional anesthesia and MAC decreased over time (8.0%-6.8%, 36.8%-27.8%, respectively; both p < 0.0001). Patients who underwent regional anesthesia were more likely to have ASA physical status >III and to reside in rural areas (52.3% and 12.9%, respectively; both p < 0.0001). Patients who underwent MAC were more likely to be older, male, receive care outside the South, and reside in urban areas (median age 65, 56.8%, 68.1%, and 70.8%, respectively; all p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that being male, having an ASA physical status >III, and each 5-year increase in age resulted in increased odds of receiving alternatives to general anesthesia (regional anesthesia adjusted odds ratios (AORs) 1.06, 1.12, and 1.26, MAC AORs 1.09, 1.2, and 1.1, respectively; all p < 0.0001). Treatment in the Midwest, South, or West was associated with decreased odds of receiving alternatives to general anesthesia compared to the Northeast (regional anesthesia AORs 0.28, 0.38, and 0.03, all p < 0.0001; MAC 0.76, 0.13, and 0.43, respectively; all p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of regional anesthesia and MAC with local anesthesia for arteriovenous access creation has decreased over time with general anesthesia remaining the primary anesthetic type. Anesthetic choice, however, varies with patient characteristics and geography.

Advocacy for Anesthesiologists

Advocating for anesthesiology is a professional responsibility. We need to make the public aware of the role we play in assuring their safety and comfort; and we must also ensure that payment models are fair and commensurate with the quality of our work.

An Overview of Commonly Used Data Sources in Observational Research in Anesthesia

Anesthesia research using existing databases has drastically expanded over the last decade. The most commonly used data sources in multi-institutional observational research are administrative databases and clinical registries. These databases are powerful tools to address research questions that are difficult to answer with smaller samples or single-institution information. Given that observational database research has established itself as valuable field in anesthesiology, we systematically reviewed publications in 3 high-impact North American anesthesia journals in the past 5 years with the goal to characterize its scope. We identified a wide range of data sources used for anesthesia-related research. Research topics ranged widely spanning questions regarding optimal anesthesia type and analgesic protocols to outcomes and cost of care both on a national and a local level. Researchers should choose their data sources based on various factors such as the population encompassed by the database, ability of the data to adequately address the research question, budget, acceptable limitations, available data analytics resources, and pipeline of follow-up studies.

The Case for the Anesthesiologist-Informaticist

Health care has been transformed by computerization, and the use of electronic health record systems has become widespread. Anesthesia information management systems are commonly used in the operating room to maintain records of anesthetic care delivery. The perioperative environment and the practice of anesthesia generate a large volume of data that may be reused to support clinical decision-making, research, and process improvement. Anesthesiologists trained in clinical informatics, referred to as informaticists or informaticians, may help implement and optimize anesthesia information management systems. They may also participate in clinical research, management of information systems, and quality improvement in the operating room or throughout a health care system. Here, we describe the specialty of clinical informatics, how anesthesiologists may obtain training in clinical informatics, and the considerations particular to the subspecialty of anesthesia informatics. Management of perioperative information systems, implementation of computerized clinical decision support systems in the perioperative environment, the role of virtual visits and remote monitoring, perioperative informatics research, perioperative process improvement, leadership, and change management are described from the perspective of the anesthesiologist-informaticist.

Trends in Peripheral Nerve Block Usage in Mastectomy and Lumpectomy: Analysis of a National Database From 2010 to 2018

BACKGROUND

Compared to general anesthesia, regional anesthesia confers several benefits including improved pain control and decreased postoperative opioid consumption. While the benefits of peripheral nerve blocks (PNB) have been well studied, there are little epidemiological data on PNB usage in mastectomy and lumpectomy procedures. The primary objective of our study was to assess national trends of the annual proportion of PNB use in breast surgery from 2010 to 2018. We also identified factors associated with PNB use for breast surgery.

METHODS

We identified lumpectomy and mastectomy surgical cases with and without PNB between 2010 and 2018 using the Anesthesia Quality Institute National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry (AQI NACOR). We modeled the nonlinear association between year of procedure and PNB use with segmented mixed-effects logistic regression clustered on facility identifier. The association between PNB use and year of procedure, age, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA PS), facility type, facility region, weekday, and tissue expander use was also modeled using mixed-effects logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 189,854 surgical cases from 2010 to 2018 that met criteria, 86.2% were lumpectomy cases and 13.8% were mastectomy cases. The proportion of lumpectomy cases with PNB was <0.1% in 2010 and increased each subsequent year to 1.9% in 2018 (trend P < .0001). The proportion of mastectomy cases with PNB was 0.5% in 2010 and 13% in 2018 (trend P < .0001). The year 2014 was the breakpoint selected for segmented regression. Before 2014, the odds of PNB among the mastectomy cases was not significantly different from year to year. After 2014, the odds of PNB increased by 2.24-fold each year (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.00-2.49; P < .001); interaction test for pre-2014 versus post-2014 was P < .001. Similar trends were seen in the lumpectomy cases, where after 2014, the odds of PNB increased by 2.03-fold (95% CI, 1.81-2.27; P < .001); interaction test for pre-2014 versus post-2014 was P < .001. In the mastectomy cohort, year of procedure ≥2014, female sex, facility region, and tissue expander use were associated with higher odds of PNB. For lumpectomy cases, year of procedure ≥2014 and facility region were associated with higher odds of PNB use.

CONCLUSIONS

We found increased annual utilization of PNB for mastectomy and lumpectomy since 2010, although absolute prevalence is low. PNB use was associated with year of procedure for both lumpectomy and mastectomy, particularly post-2014.

Big Data in Studying Acute Pain and Regional Anesthesia

The digital transformation of healthcare is advancing, leading to an increasing availability of clinical data for research. Perioperative big data initiatives were established to monitor treatment quality and benchmark outcomes. However, big data analyses have long exceeded the status of pure quality surveillance instruments. Large retrospective studies nowadays often represent the first approach to new questions in clinical research and pave the way for more expensive and resource intensive prospective trials. As a consequence, the utilization of big data in acute pain and regional anesthesia research has considerably increased over the last decade. Multicentric clinical registries and administrative databases (e.g., healthcare claims databases) have collected millions of cases until today, on which basis several important research questions were approached. In acute pain research, big data was used to assess postoperative pain outcomes, opioid utilization, and the efficiency of multimodal pain management strategies. In regional anesthesia, adverse events and potential benefits of regional anesthesia on postoperative morbidity and mortality were evaluated. This article provides a narrative review on the growing importance of big data for research in acute postoperative pain and regional anesthesia.

Anesthetic Choice for Atrial Fibrillation Ablation: A National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The authors evaluated the type of anesthesia administered in atrial fibrillation ablation, hypothesizing that monitored anesthesia care is used less frequently than general anesthesia.

DESIGN

A retrospective study.

SETTING

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data, which are multi-institutional from across the United States.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients who underwent elective atrial fibrillation ablation between 2013 and 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry data were evaluated, and covariates were selected a priori within multivariate models to assess for predictors of anesthetic type. A total of 54,321 patients underwent atrial fibrillation ablation; 3,251 (6.0%) received monitored anesthesia care. Patients who received monitored anesthesia care were more likely to be >80 years old (12.4% v 4.9%; p < 0.0001), female (36.1% v 34.3%; p < 0.0001), have American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status >III (17.28% v 10.48%; p < 0.0001), and reside in urban areas (62.23% v 53.37%; p < 0.0001). They received care in the Northeast (17.6% v 10.1%; p < 0.0001) at low-volume centers (median 224 v 284 procedures; p < 0.0001). Multivariate analysis revealed that each five-year increase in age, being female, and having an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status >III resulted in a 7% (p < 0.0001), 9% (p = 0.032), and 200% (p < 0.0001) increased odds of receiving monitored anesthesia care, respectively. Requiring additional ablation of atria or of a second arrhythmia and residing outside the Northeast resulted in a decreased odds of monitored anesthesia care (adjusted odds ratio 0.24 [p=0.002] and < 0.5 [p < 0.03], respectively). For each 50 cases performed annually at a center, the odds decreased by 5% (p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

General anesthesia is the most common type of anesthesia administered for atrial fibrillation ablation. The type of anesthesia administered, however, varies with patient, procedural, and hospital characteristics.

Patient health status and case complexity of outpatient surgeries at various facility types in the United States: An analysis using the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Among the various types of outpatient surgery centers, there are differences in higher American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA PS) scores and surgical complexity among patients who are undergoing surgery. The primary objective of this study was to describe the differences performed at various types of outpatient surgery facilities.

DESIGN

We performed a retrospective analysis of the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry (NACOR) data.

SETTING

NACOR from 2012 to 2017.

PATIENTS

From 2012 to 2017, there were a total of 13,053,115 outpatient surgeries in the database. After removing cases with unknown facility type, the final study sample was 9,217,336.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

MEASUREMENTS

To calculate the probability of either American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA PS) score ≥ 3 or physiologically complex cases (defined as Common Procedural Terminology start-up units ≥8), we performed mixed effects logistic regression for each institution per facility type, controlling for year and using facility identification as the random effect. We present the mean rate of these two classifications as case per 10,000 cases and report the 99.9% confidence interval (CI), to control for multiple comparisons.

MAIN RESULTS

Among all cases, 5,919,844 (64.2%) were classified as ASA PS 1 or 2 and 254,110 (2.8%) of surgical procedures were considered physiologically complex. The mean rate of cases with ASA PS ≥ 3in the university setting was 2982 per 10,000 cases [99.9% CI 2701-3278 per 10,000 cases]. Large community hospitals had a higher proportion of ASA PS ≥3 patients, medium-sized hospitals had no difference, and all other facility types had a decreased proportion. The mean rate of cases that were physiologically complex in the university setting was 133 per 10,000 cases [99.9% CI 117-151 per 10,000 cases]. Large community hospitals had a higher proportion of physiologically complex cases, medium-sized and small-sized hospitals had no difference, and all other facility types had a decreased proportion.

CONCLUSIONS

Freestanding and attached surgery centers exhibited smaller rates of patients that were ASA PS ≥ 3, as well as a decrease in surgically complex cases, when compared to university settings. This suggests that the level of conservativeness for patient and surgery appropriateness for outpatient surgery differs across various facility types.

Post-operative intensive care unit admission after elective non-cardiac surgery: A single-center analysis of the NSQIP database

BACKGROUND

Admission to the intensive care unit (ICU) after surgery can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. This observational cohort study aims to identify perioperative factors associated with post-operative ICU admission in patients undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery.

METHODS

Data from the ACS NSQIP^® database at a tertiary care academic medical center were analyzed from January 2011 to September 2016. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression of patient and surgery-specific characteristics was performed to assess association with post-operative ICU admission. The Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) and International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9) billing codes, as well as associated outcomes, were reviewed.

RESULTS

Of 5254 database patient records, 1150 met our inclusion criteria. Elevated body mass index (BMI), longer procedure duration and a diagnosis of disseminated cancer were associated with post-operative ICU admission. Prostatectomy and morbid obesity were the most common CPT and ICD-9 codes identified. Patients who were admitted to the ICU after surgery had a longer hospital length of stay (LOS), had a higher frequency of readmission, re-operation, and in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSION

Admission to the ICU after elective non-cardiac surgery is common. Our analysis of the ACS NSQIP^® database identified elevated BMI, longer duration of surgery and disseminated cancer as predictors of post-operative ICU admissions in patients undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery.

Development and validation of a predictive model for American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status

BACKGROUND

The American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) classification system was developed to categorize the fitness of patients before surgery. Increasingly, the ASA-PS has been applied to other uses including justification of inpatient admission. Our objectives were to develop and cross-validate a statistical model for predicting ASA-PS; and 2) assess the concurrent and predictive validity of the model by assessing associations between model-derived ASA-PS, observed ASA-PS, and a diverse set of 30-day outcomes.

METHODS

Using the 2014 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Participant Use Data File, we developed and internally cross-validated multinomial regression models to predict ASA-PS using preoperative NSQIP data. Accuracy was assessed with C-Statistics and calibration plots. We assessed both concurrent and predictive validity of model-derived ASA-PS relative to observed ASA-PS and 30-day outcomes. To aid further research and use of the ASA-PS model, we implemented it into an online calculator.

RESULTS

Of the 566,797 elective procedures in the final analytic dataset, 8.9% were ASA-PS 1, 48.9% were ASA-PS 2, 39.1% were ASA-PS 3, and 3.2% were ASA-PS 4. The accuracy of the 21-variable model to predict ASA-PS was C = 0.77 +/- 0.0025. The model-derived ASA-PS had stronger association with key indicators of preoperative status including comorbidities and higher BMI (concurrent validity) compared to observed ASA-PS, but less strong associations with postoperative complications (predictive validity). The online ASA-PS calculator may be accessed at https://s-spire-clintools.shinyapps.io/ASA_PS_Estimator/ CONCLUSIONS: Model-derived ASA-PS better tracked key indicators of preoperative status compared to observed ASA-PS. The ability to have an electronically derived measure of ASA-PS can potentially be useful in research, quality measurement, and clinical applications.

What we can learn from Big Data about factors influencing perioperative outcome

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This narrative review will discuss what value Big Data has to offer anesthesiology and aims to highlight recently published articles of large databases exploring factors influencing perioperative outcome. Additionally, the future perspectives of Big Data and its major pitfalls will be discussed.

RECENT FINDINGS

The potential of Big Data has given an incentive to create nationwide and anesthesia-initiated registries like the MPOG and NACOR. These large databases have contributed in elucidating some of the rare perioperative complications, such as declined cognition after exposure to general anesthesia and epidural hematomas in parturients. Additionally, they are useful in finding patterns such as similar outcome in subtypes of beta-blockers and lower incidence of pneumonia in preoperative influenza vaccinations in the elderly.

SUMMARY

Big Data is becoming increasingly popular with the collaborative collection of registries offering anesthesia a way to explore rare perioperative complications and outcome to encourage further hypotheses testing. Although Big Data has its flaws in security, lack of expertise and methodological concerns, the future potential of analytics combined with genomics, machine learning and real-time decision support looks promising.

Concepts for the Simulation Community: Development of the International Simulation Data Registry

STATEMENT

The past several decades have seen tremendous growth in our understanding of best practices in simulation-based healthcare education. At present, however, there is limited infrastructure available to assist programs in translation of these best practices into more standardized educational approaches, higher quality of care, and ultimately improved outcomes. In 2014, the International Simulation Data Registry (ISDR) was launched to address this important issue. The existence of such a registry has important implications not just for educational practice but also for research. The ISDR currently archives data related to pulseless arrest, malignant hyperthermia, and difficult airway simulations. Case metrics are designed to mirror the American Heart Association's Get With the Guidelines Registry, allowing for direct comparisons with clinical scenarios. This article describes the rationale for the ISDR, and outlines its development. Current data are presented to highlight the educational and research value of this approach. Projected future developments are also discussed.

Comparison of Anesthesia Times and Billing Patterns by Anesthesia Practitioners

Importance

Most physicians must exercise discretion in choosing billing details that determine payment for their services. Understanding the degree to which physicians inappropriately use this discretion has important implications for payment policies. However, separating higher case complexity from inappropriate billing has made this a challenging issue to study. Anesthesia offers a useful test case because practitioners are partly compensated by self-reported length of time (anesthesia time) spent on a case.

Objective

To characterize the incidence and consequences of inappropriate billing practices among anesthesia practitioners.

Design, Setting, and Participants

In this cross-sectional study of data from a large anesthesia registry, 6 261 955 procedures performed by 4221 anesthesia practitioners (physician anesthesiologists, nurse anesthetists, and anesthesiologist assistants) between January 1, 2010, and March 31, 2015, were studied. A total of 3047 practitioners practiced primarily in community hospitals, whereas 453 practiced primarily in university hospitals and 721 practiced in other settings (eg, specialty hospital).

Exposures

Practitioners with anomalous patterns were identified as those reporting an unusually high number of anesthesia times ending in a multiple of 5 minutes (eg, 65 minutes).

Main Outcomes and Measures

Incidence of anomalous patterns among anesthesia practitioners and the increase in anesthesia times associated with these patterns.

Results

This study included 4221 practitioners who each performed at least 300 anesthetic procedures. Practitioners in the top fifth percentile reported anesthesia times ending in a multiple of 5 minutes a mean (SD) of 53.7% (13.7%) of the time (range, 36.8%-96.1%), whereas practitioners in the 6th to 10th percentiles reported anesthesia times ending in a multiple of 5 minutes a mean (SD) of 31.8% (2.0%) of the time (range, 29.2%-36.7%). Practitioners in the top fifth percentile submitted billing for anesthesia times that exceeded the expected time by a mean of 21.5 minutes (95% CI, 15.8-27.1 minutes).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study, findings suggest that anesthesia practitioners with the highest tendency to report anesthesia times ending in a multiple of 5 minutes did so with high frequency, which reflects anomalous billing. These practitioners also sought payment for longer-than-expected anesthesia times, which would correspond to higher payment for their services.

Estimating pediatric general anesthesia exposure: Quantifying duration and risk

INTRODUCTION

Understanding the duration of pediatric general anesthesia exposure in contemporary practice is important for identifying groups at risk for long general anesthesia exposures and designing trials examining associations between general anesthesia exposure and neurodevelopmental outcomes.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis to estimate pediatric general anesthesia exposure duration during 2010-2015 using the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry.

RESULTS

A total of 1 548 021 pediatric general anesthetics were included. Median general anesthesia duration was 57 minutes (IQR: 28-86) with 90th percentile 145 minutes. Children aged <1 year had the longest median exposure duration (79 minutes, IQR: 39-119) with 90th percentile 210 minutes, and 13.7% of this very young cohort was exposed for >3 hours. High ASA physical status and care at a university hospital were associated with longer exposure times.

CONCLUSION

While the vast majority (94%) of children undergoing general anesthesia are exposed for <3 hours, certain groups may be at increased risk for longer exposures. These findings may help guide the design of future trials aimed at understanding neurodevelopmental impact of prolonged exposure in these high-risk groups.

A Retrospective Analysis of the Variability in Case Duration for Aortic Valve Replacement and Association With Hospital Facility Types

OBJECTIVE

Currently, there are no large-scale studies that compare differences in case duration of aortic valve replacements (AVRs). The primary objective of this study was to determine associations of hospital facility type, geographic location, case volume per year, and time of day with duration of valve replacement surgery.

DESIGN

Retrospective.

SETTING

Data from the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry.

PARTICIPANTS

National data from university and non-university hospitals.

INTERVENTIONS

No interventions.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

All AVRs from the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry were identified from 2010 to 2014. Mean case duration for all AVRs was 360.8 ± 95.8 minutes and was presented based on facility type (university hospital, large community hospital, medium-sized community hospital, and other); US geographic region; time of day (cases performed after 5 pm and before 7 am v day shift); and case volume per year. A multivariable linear regression model was built to determine the association of various patient, procedural, and facility characteristics with case duration. University hospitals were associated with increased case duration for AVRs (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

With this large national database, the authors demonstrated that academic hospitals, time of day of the surgery, US region, and case volume per year for a facility are related to the case duration of AVRs.

The effect of facility characteristics on patient safety, patient experience, and service availability for procedures in non-hospital-affiliated outpatient settings: A systematic review

Background

Over recent decades, numerous medical procedures have migrated out of hospitals and into freestanding ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) and physician offices, with possible implications for patient outcomes. In response, states have passed regulations for office-based surgeries, private organizations have established standards for facility accreditation, and professional associations have developed clinical guidelines. While abortions have been performed in office setting for decades, states have also enacted laws requiring that facilities that perform abortions meet specific requirements. The extent to which facility requirements have an impact on patient outcomes—for any procedure—is unclear.

Methods and findings

We conducted a systematic review to examine the effect of outpatient facility type (ASC vs. office) and specific facility characteristics (e.g., facility accreditation, emergency response protocols, clinician qualifications, physical plant characteristics, other policies) on patient safety, patient experience and service availability in non-hospital-affiliated outpatient settings. To identify relevant research, we searched databases of the published academic literature (PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science) and websites of governmental and non-governmental organizations. Two investigators reviewed 3049 abstracts and full-text articles against inclusion/exclusion criteria and assessed the quality of 22 identified articles. Most studies were hampered by methodological challenges, with 12 of 22 not meeting minimum quality criteria. Of 10 studies included in the review, most (6) examined the effect of facility type on patient safety. Existing research appears to indicate no difference in patient safety for outpatient procedures performed in ASCs vs. physician offices. Research about specific facility characteristics is insufficient to draw conclusions.

Conclusions

More and higher quality research is needed to determine if there is a public health problem to be addressed through facility regulation and, if so, which facility characteristics may result in consistent improvements to patient safety while not adversely affecting patient experience or service availability.

Safety of Non-Operating Room Anesthesia: A Closed Claims Update

Malpractice claims for non-operating room anesthesia care (NORA) had a higher proportion of claims for death than claims in operating rooms (ORs). NORA claims most frequently involved monitored anesthesia care. Inadequate oxygenation/ventilation was responsible for one-third of NORA claims, often judged probably preventable by better monitoring. Fewer malpractice claims for NORA occurred than for OR anesthesia as assessed by the relative numbers of in NORA versus OR procedures. The proportion of claims in cardiology and radiology NORA locations were increased compared with estimates of cases in these locations. Although NORA is safe, adherence to safe clinical practice is important.

A prospective observational study of the use of desflurane anesthesia in Indian adult inpatients undergoing surgery: The Registry in India on Suprane Emergence registry

Background and Aims:

Limited registry studies are available on the use of anesthetic agents. This registry was conducted to evaluate emergence outcomes in Indian adult patients undergoing surgery with desflurane anesthesia.

Material and Methods:

This multicenter, prospective, non-interventional, observational study (Registry in India on Suprane Emergence [RISE] registry) included adult inpatients who received desflurane as general anesthetic for surgical procedure of ≥2 h. Patients were stratified by age into three groups: ≥18–40 years, ≥41–65 years, and >65 years. Data on patients’ demographics, practice, and usage pattern of medications were collected. The primary efficacy outcomes were time to extubation, time to response to verbal command, and time to orientation.

Results:

Of 236 patients screened, 201 (≥18–40 years, n = 70; ≥41–65 years, n = 65; >65 years, n = 66) were enrolled in the study. Mean time to extubation observed in ≥18–40 years group was 7.2 ± 4.1 min, ≥41–65 years was 11.6 ± 8.99 min, and >65 years was 12.0 ± 10.5 min. Mean time to response to verbal command was 7.4 ± 4.3 min for ≥18–40 years, 10.9 ± 8.5 min for ≥41–65 years, and 10.0 ± 5.4 min for >65 years. Mean time to orientation was 13.0 ± 7.0 min for ≥18–40 years, 16.1 ± 12.0 min for ≥41–65 years, and 17.0 ± 8.6 min for >65 years. Incidence of nausea and retching/vomiting was observed in 8% of patients each in the postoperative period, and these complications were seen more in the >65 years age group. Overall, desflurane treatment maintained hemodynamic stability and no major airway events were reported.

Conclusions:

The RISE registry data suggest that desflurane-based anesthesia provides early recovery with stable hemodynamics without any airway adverse events, in a wide variety of surgical procedures.

US National Anesthesia Workload on Saturday and Sunday Mornings

BACKGROUND

In order to provide guidance to organizations considering elective weekend surgical case scheduling, we analyzed data from the American Society of Anesthesiologist's Anesthesia Quality Institute. We determined the US anesthesia workload on Saturdays and Sundays.

METHODS

The American Society of Anesthesiologist's Anesthesia Quality Institute data were from all US anesthesia groups that submitted cases to the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry for 2013. For each of the N = 2,075,188 cases, we identified the local date and time of the start of anesthesia care and the duration of anesthesia care. Anesthesia workload was measured as the time from the start to the end of continuous anesthesia care. Because elective cases are rarely scheduled on Sundays, we considered the difference in workload between Saturday and Sunday to estimate elective case scheduling. This difference would be an overestimate if some patients' scheduled cases were postponed from Friday to Saturday. Data are reported as mean ± standard error; N = 13 four-week periods.

RESULTS

The difference in the anesthesia minutes between Saturdays versus Sundays 7:00 AM to 2:59 PM (ie, elective caseload) represented just 0.38% ± 0.02% of the total minutes nationwide; Saturday 1.57% ± 0.03% versus Sunday 1.19% ± 0.02%. The P < .00001 comparing the 0.38% with 1.0% and, also, with 0.5% (upper 99% confidence interval = 0.42%).

CONCLUSIONS

The imputed Saturday elective schedule represents a tiny percentage of overall anesthetic workload nationwide. Saturday elective surgery is currently an uncommon practice in the United States. Based on this prior knowledge, organizations considering changes to their current scheduling strategies should perform a thorough statistical analysis of their local workload prior to implementation and apply evidence-based criteria to guide their decision-making process.

Patterns of intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring for patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty under general anesthesia: a retrospective analysis of 23,073 patients

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is typically performed in the beach-chair position. Maintenance of adequate mean arterial pressure is required to provide appropriate cerebral perfusion pressure and prevent cerebral ischemia. Placement of an arterial line to facilitate invasive monitoring is discretionary, based on clinical judgment. We aimed to describe patient, surgical and institutional factors associated with the current use of blood pressure monitoring via an arterial line for TSA. We used de-identified patient data from the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry between 2010 and 2015 to identify patients undergoing TSA under general anesthesia. We conducted a multivariable logistic regression model to demonstrate factors significantly associated with arterial line placement. We report results as odds ratios (OR) with their associated 95 % confidence intervals (CI). Of 23,073 patients undergoing TSA under general anesthesia, 443 (1.92 %) had intra-arterial blood pressure monitoring. Patient age over 65 years old (OR 1.74, CI 1.37-2.21), congestive heart failure (OR 7.09, CI 2.63-19.14) and surgery lasting at least 180 min (OR 4.10, CI 3.33-5.05) were all associated with increased odds for arterial line placement. Compared to university hospitals, arterial line placement was more likely in attached or freestanding surgical centers (OR 2.01, CI 1.37-2.96) and less likely in medium sized community hospitals (OR 0.62, CI 0.42-0.93), small community hospitals (OR 0.11, CI 0.03-0.34) and facilities performing less than 100 TSAs per year (OR 0.19, CI 0.12-0.31). Utilization of arterial line monitoring for TSA has associations with both institutional and patient factors. This study demonstrates the national patterns for the use of arterial lines for TSA and may serve as a resource to aid in clinical judgment.

Diversity and Similarity of Anesthesia Procedures in the United States During and Among Regular Work Hours, Evenings, and Weekends

BACKGROUND

Anesthesiologists providing care during off hours (ie, weekends or holidays, or cases started during the evening or late afternoon) are more likely to care for patients at greater risk of sustaining major adverse events than when they work during regular hours (eg, Monday through Friday, from 7:00 AM to 2:59 PM). We consider the logical inconsistency of using subspecialty teams during regular hours but not during weekends or evenings.

METHODS

We analyzed data from the Anesthesia Quality Institute's National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry (NACOR). Among the hospitals in the United States, we estimated the average number of common types of anesthesia procedures (ie, diversity measured as inverse of Herfindahl index), and the average difference in the number of common procedures between 2 off-hours periods (regular hours versus weekends, and regular hours versus evenings). We also used NACOR data to estimate the average similarity in the distributions of procedures between regular hours and weekends and between regular hours and evenings in US facilities. Results are reported as mean ± standard error of the mean among 399 facilities nationwide with weekend cases.

RESULTS

The distributions of common procedures were moderately similar (ie, not large, <.8) between regular hours and evenings (similarity index .59 ± .01) and between regular hours and weekends (similarity index, .55 ± .02). For most facilities, the number of common procedures differed by <5 procedures between regular hours and evenings (74.4% of facilities, P < .0001) and between regular hours and weekends (64.7% of facilities, P < .0001). The average number of common procedures was 13.59 ± .12 for regular hours, 13.12 ± .13 for evenings, and 9.43 ± .13 for weekends. The pairwise differences by facility were .13 ± .07 procedures (P = .090) between regular hours and evenings and 3.37 ± .12 procedures (P < .0001) between regular hours and weekends. In contrast, the differences were -5.18 ± .12 and 7.59 ± .13, respectively, when calculated using nationally pooled data. This was because the numbers of common procedures were 32.23 ± .05, 37.41 ± .11, and 24.64 ± .12 for regular hours, evenings, and weekends, respectively (ie, >2x the number of common procedures calculated by facility).

CONCLUSIONS

The numbers of procedures commonly performed at most facilities are fewer in number than those that are commonly performed nationally. Thus, decisions on anesthesia specialization should be based on quantitative analysis of local data rather than national recommendations using pooled data. By facility, the number of different procedures that take place during regular hours and off hours (diversity) is essentially the same, but there is only moderate similarity in the procedures performed. Thus, at many facilities, anesthesiologists who work principally within a single specialty during regular work hours will likely not have substantial contemporary experience with many procedures performed during off hours.

Analysis of Unplanned Intensive Care Unit Admissions in Postoperative Pediatric Patients

BACKGROUND

Currently, there are only a few retrospective, single-institution studies that have addressed the prevalence and risk factors associated with unplanned admissions to the pediatric intensive care unit (ICU) after surgery. Based on the limited amount of studies, it appears that airway and respiratory complications put a child at increased risk for unplanned ICU admission. A more extensive and diverse analysis of unplanned postoperative admissions to the ICU is needed to address risk factors that have yet to be revealed by the current literature.

AIM

To establish a rate of unplanned postoperative ICU admissions in pediatric patients using a large, multi-institution data set and to further characterize the associated risk factors.

METHODS

Data from the National Anesthesia Clinical Outcomes Registry were analyzed. We recorded the overall risk of unplanned postoperative ICU admission in patients younger than 18 years and performed univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis to identify the associated patient, surgical, and anesthetic-related characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the 324 818 cases analyzed, 211 reported an unexpected ICU admission. There was an increased likelihood of unplanned postoperative ICU in infants (age <1 year) and children who were classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification of III or IV. Likewise, longer case duration and cases requiring general anesthesia were also associated with unplanned ICU admissions.

CONCLUSION

This study establishes a rate of unplanned ICU admission following surgery in the heterogeneous pediatric population. This is the first study to utilize such a large data set encompassing a wide range of practice environments to identify risk factors leading to unplanned postoperative ICU admissions. Our study revealed that patient, surgical, and anesthetic complexity each contributed to an increased number of unplanned ICU admissions in the pediatric population.