Anaesthetic care of patients undergoing primary hip and knee arthroplasty: consensus recommendations from the International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) based on a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding anaesthetic practice in hip/knee arthroplasty surgery is needed for improved healthcare outcomes.

METHODS

The International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) systematic review, including randomised controlled and observational studies comparing neuraxial to general anaesthesia regarding major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, genitourinary, thromboembolic, neurological, infectious, and bleeding complications. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, from 1946 to May 17, 2018 were queried. Meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was utilised to assess evidence quality and to develop recommendations.

RESULTS

The analysis of 94 studies revealed that neuraxial anaesthesia was associated with lower odds or no difference in virtually all reported complications, except for urinary retention. Excerpt of complications for neuraxial vs general anaesthesia in hip/knee arthroplasty, respectively: mortality odds ratio (OR): 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57-0.80/OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.60-1.15; pulmonary OR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.52-0.80/OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.58-0.81; acute renal failure OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.59-0.81/OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.65-0.82; deep venous thrombosis OR: 0.52, 95% CI: 0.42-0.65/OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.64-0.93; infections OR: 0.73, 95% CI: 0.67-0.79/OR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.76-0.85; and blood transfusion OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.82-0.89/OR: 0.84, 95% CI: 0.82-0.87.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendation: primary neuraxial anaesthesia is preferred for knee arthroplasty, given several positive postoperative outcome benefits; evidence level: low, weak recommendation.

RECOMMENDATION

neuraxial anaesthesia is recommended for hip arthroplasty given associated outcome benefits; evidence level: moderate-low, strong recommendation. Based on current evidence, the consensus group recommends neuraxial over general anaesthesia for hip/knee arthroplasty.

TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42018099935.

Simulated death enhances learner attitudes regarding simulation

Introduction

Despite the widespread use of simulated death in healthcare education, some view it as a controversial learning tool due to potential psychological harm. Others believe that allowing death during simulation enhances participant learning. Sparse data exist in the literature about learner attitudes towards simulated death. Our objective was to establish a link between exposure to simulated death and learner attitudes regarding simulation. Our hypothesis was that exposure to simulated death will positively affect learner attitudes towards simulation.

Methods

Anonymous surveys were distributed to participants of simulations conducted by our department from January 2014 to December 2015. Collected survey data included total number of simulation scenarios, exposure to death and participants' views towards simulation afterwards. Participants also rated the simulation on a Likert scale. We compared demographic and simulation data for participants who experienced simulated death versus participants who did not. Exposure to death and clinical level were included as predictor variables in logistic regressions using the simulator experience variables as outcomes.

Results

250 survey responses were analysed. 64% of participants were attendings. 82% of participants experienced death during simulation. The group that experienced simulated death gave significantly higher ratings (4.77 vs 4.50, p=0.004) and a higher percentage of maximum ratings on the Likert scale (83% vs 59%, p=0.0002). More participants who experienced death thought that simulated death could enhance learning (76% vs 59%, p=0.021). When adjusted for training level, those who experienced death in simulation were nearly twice as likely to think that death can enhance learning (p=0.049) and 133% more likely to give the simulation the highest rating (p=0.036).

Conclusions

Survey participants who experienced simulated death were more likely to think that death can enhance learning and more likely to give the simulation the highest rating, thereby demonstrating that exposure to simulated death positively affects learner attitudes regarding simulation.