Neuromuscular monitoring during general anaesthesia: a review of current national and international guidelines

Background

The extent to which neuromuscular monitoring is included in professional anaesthesia society guidelines is unclear. Our aim was to comprehensively review neuromuscular monitoring guidelines published by these societies.

Methods

National societies were identified using the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists' member list and further manual searches were undertaken to identify multinational societies and specialist medical colleges. A web search and secondary literature search were conducted to locate guidelines for monitoring during anaesthesia. The income of each nation or group of nations was determined using the World Bank classification.

Results

Forty guidelines were identified. Of 38 nations or classifiable groups of nations, 25 (66%) were high-income nations and 13 (34%) were middle-income nations. Neuromuscular monitoring was mentioned in 36 (90%) of the 40 guidelines. Availability of neuromuscular monitoring was mentioned in 17 (47%) guidelines (mandated in eight [47%] and recommended in nine [53%]). Use of neuromuscular monitoring was mentioned in 26 (72%) guidelines (mandated in three [12%] and recommended in 23 [88%]). Quantitative neuromuscular monitoring was specified in nine (25%) of the guidelines, with the type of monitoring unspecified in the remaining 27 (75%) of the 36 guidelines. Quantitative monitoring was only mandated in one guideline, and this was only when monitoring equipment was available.

Conclusions

We identified a gap in the availability of professional anaesthesia society neuromuscular monitoring guidelines, particularly in middle- and low-income nations. Recommendations about availability, use and type of monitoring varied among guidelines. An effort to improve the availability and consistency of guidelines is required.