Anesthesiology最新文献

Background: Antibiotics play a crucial role in preventing surgical site infections, yet adherence to Infectious Disease Society of America guidelines varies widely. This qualitative study aimed to explore factors influencing perioperative antibiotic administration and assess the potential impact of a clinical decision support tool on guideline adherence.

Methods: In this qualitative study, perioperative personnel with diverse roles (surgeons, anesthesiologists, certified nurse anesthetists, trainees, and pharmacists) were interviewed using a semistructured interview format from September 2023 through April 2024. Interviews were then analyzed for codes, which were assigned to concepts using the constant comparison method for assessment of factors that were described as barriers or facilitators of guideline adherence.

Results: After 3 piloting interviews, 9 sessions were conducted with a total of 17 participants: 7 attending anesthesiologists, 3 resident trainees, 2 perioperative pharmacists, 3 Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists, and 2 attending surgeons. Key themes emerged: (1) limited familiarity with Infectious Disease Society of America antibiotic guidelines, (2) lack of standardization and optimization of antibiotic decision-making process, (3) challenges with managing β-lactam allergies, (4) difficulty optimizing vancomycin timing, and (5) perceived benefit of a clinical decision support tool in enhancing workflow and guideline adherence.

Conclusions: Nonadherence to antibiotic guidelines in the perioperative setting often results from a lack of structured workflow. The interviews provide a foundation for developing a clinical decision support tool tailored to provider needs, aiming to improve user satisfaction and promote better adherence to perioperative antibiotic guidelines.

Background: Postoperative nausea and vomiting is common after general anesthesia, with consequences for patient outcomes, satisfaction with care, and healthcare costs. The aim was to compare a new treatment, chewing gum, with a widely used intravenous agent, ondansetron, to treat postoperative nausea and vomiting in female patients in the postanesthesia care unit.

Methods: This study was a multicenter, randomized, controlled noninferiority trial in 17 hospitals in Australia and New Zealand. Female patients aged 12 yr or older undergoing volatile anesthetic-based general anesthesia for laparoscopic or breast surgery were enrolled. Protocolized antiemetic prophylaxis was administered. Patients who developed postoperative nausea and vomiting in the postanesthesia care unit were randomized to either 15 min of chewing gum or 4 mg intravenous ondansetron. The primary outcome was cessation of nausea, retching, or vomiting with no recurrence nor rescue medication for 2 h after administration of the randomized intervention ( i.e. , complete response).

Results: Of 865 enrolled patients, 218 were randomized. In a per-protocol analysis, 50 of 105 (47.6%) ondansetron-treated patients compared with 31 of 103 (30.1%) chewing gum-treated patients achieved the primary outcome (absolute risk difference [95% CI], -17.3 [-30.4 to -4.3]%), not reaching the prespecified noninferiority limit. The time to complete response was longer for patients randomized to chewing gum (hazard ratio [95% CI], 0.53 [0.34 to 0.83]), and they were more likely to receive antiemetics in the 24 h after surgery (absolute risk difference [95% CI], 14.1 [1.6 to 26.5]%).

Conclusions: Chewing gum cannot be recommended as an alternative to ondansetron for treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting in female patients administered antiemetic prophylaxis.