Anesthesia delivery via manual control versus end-tidal control: A scoping review

IF 1.4 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY Trends in Anaesthesia and Critical Care Pub Date : 2024-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.tacc.2024.101501
John W. Beard , Stephanie Yacoubian , Marco Luchetti , Halit O. Yapici , R.R. Kennedy
{"title":"Anesthesia delivery via manual control versus end-tidal control: A scoping review","authors":"John W. Beard ,&nbsp;Stephanie Yacoubian ,&nbsp;Marco Luchetti ,&nbsp;Halit O. Yapici ,&nbsp;R.R. Kennedy","doi":"10.1016/j.tacc.2024.101501","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This scoping review examined available evidence, including usability, efficiency, and accuracy, on the delivery of general inhaled anesthesia with End-tidal Control (EtC) versus manual methods. Data was extracted to identify consistency in measurements used, trends in subsequent outcomes, and areas for further study.</div><div>Twelve studies were identified: six (50.0 %) were randomized controlled trials. Nine studies (75.0 %) evaluated usability outcomes, eight (66.7 %) assessed efficiency-related outcomes, and six (50.0 %) compared the accuracy of target-level maintenance during anesthesia, between EtC and manual control.</div><div>Overall, 66.7 % (n = 6) of studies assessing usability found EtC required less than half as many provider interventions than manual control. The majority of studies found EtC performed as well or better than manual control, rapidly reaching target concentrations of anesthetic agent or oxygen. Four out of five studies evaluating the duration of concentration deviations found that EtC maintained concentrations within 10 % of targets for at least 90 % of the duration of delivery. Studies evaluating clinician feedback favored EtC over manual adjustments.</div><div>The findings of this review can inform anesthesia providers regarding the potential implications of using EtC for automated anesthesia delivery. Future research should provide additional prospective/randomized data from large samples, mimicking existing variables to allow continuity and quantitative synthesis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":44534,"journal":{"name":"Trends in Anaesthesia and Critical Care","volume":"58 ","pages":"Article 101501"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Trends in Anaesthesia and Critical Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210844024001709","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This scoping review examined available evidence, including usability, efficiency, and accuracy, on the delivery of general inhaled anesthesia with End-tidal Control (EtC) versus manual methods. Data was extracted to identify consistency in measurements used, trends in subsequent outcomes, and areas for further study.
Twelve studies were identified: six (50.0 %) were randomized controlled trials. Nine studies (75.0 %) evaluated usability outcomes, eight (66.7 %) assessed efficiency-related outcomes, and six (50.0 %) compared the accuracy of target-level maintenance during anesthesia, between EtC and manual control.
Overall, 66.7 % (n = 6) of studies assessing usability found EtC required less than half as many provider interventions than manual control. The majority of studies found EtC performed as well or better than manual control, rapidly reaching target concentrations of anesthetic agent or oxygen. Four out of five studies evaluating the duration of concentration deviations found that EtC maintained concentrations within 10 % of targets for at least 90 % of the duration of delivery. Studies evaluating clinician feedback favored EtC over manual adjustments.
The findings of this review can inform anesthesia providers regarding the potential implications of using EtC for automated anesthesia delivery. Future research should provide additional prospective/randomized data from large samples, mimicking existing variables to allow continuity and quantitative synthesis.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
通过手动控制与潮气末控制进行麻醉:范围综述
本范围综述研究了使用潮气末控制(EtC)与手动方法进行全身吸入麻醉的可用性、效率和准确性等方面的证据。对数据进行了提取,以确定所用测量方法的一致性、后续结果的趋势以及有待进一步研究的领域。共确定了 12 项研究:其中 6 项(50.0%)为随机对照试验。九项研究(75.0 %)评估了可用性结果,八项研究(66.7 %)评估了与效率相关的结果,六项研究(50.0 %)比较了 EtC 和人工控制在麻醉过程中维持目标水平的准确性。总体而言,66.7 %(n = 6)的可用性评估研究发现,与人工控制相比,EtC 所需的提供者干预少于一半。大多数研究发现,ETC 的性能与手动控制相当或更好,能迅速达到麻醉剂或氧气的目标浓度。对浓度偏差持续时间进行评估的五项研究中有四项发现,ETC 至少在 90% 的给药持续时间内将浓度维持在目标值的 10% 以内。对临床医生反馈进行评估的研究发现,ETC 比手动调整更受青睐。本综述的研究结果可以让麻醉提供者了解使用 EtC 进行自动麻醉给药的潜在影响。未来的研究应提供更多来自大样本的前瞻性/随机数据,模仿现有变量,以实现连续性和定量综合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
13.30%
发文量
60
审稿时长
33 days
期刊最新文献
The advantages of “closed” type management in intensive care units Vasoactive drugs for the management of maternal arterial hypotension after spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. An updated integrative narrative review A knife to the neck; An airway challenge for the Anesthesiologist: A case report Optimizing patient safety: Unveiling the significance of cuff pressure in anaesthesia Evaluation of changes in Mallampati grading in patients undergoing elective urological procedures in prone and lithotomy positions- A prospective observational study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1