Do It Often, Do It Better: Association Between Pairs of Experienced Subspecialty Anesthesia Caregivers and Postoperative Outcomes. A Retrospective Observational Study.
Anesthesiologists
Clinical Competence
Hospital Mortality
Humans
Intraoperative Care
Length of Stay
Patient Care Team
Postoperative Complications
/ etiology
Retrospective Studies
Risk Assessment
Risk Factors
Specialization
Surgical Procedures, Operative
/ adverse effects
Time Factors
Treatment Outcome
Journal
Anesthesia and analgesia
ISSN: 1526-7598
Titre abrégé: Anesth Analg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 1310650
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 03 2021
01 03 2021
Historique:
pubmed:
13
1
2021
medline:
9
3
2021
entrez:
12
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Anesthesiologists typically care for patients having a broad range of procedures. Outcomes might be improved when care is provided by caregivers experienced in particular types of surgery. We tested the hypothesis that intraoperative care provided by pairs of anesthesia caregivers having significant experience with a particular type of surgery reduces a composite of in-hospital death and 6 serious complications, including bleeding, cardiac, gastrointestinal, infectious, respiratory, and urinary complications, compared to care provided by pairs of anesthesia caregivers with less experience. We included patients having surgery lasting at least 30 minutes. Using cluster analysis, attending anesthesiologists, and Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs) were identified as experienced or inexperienced caregivers for each type of surgery at the case level. We then compared surgeries for which anesthesia was provided by a pair of experienced caregivers versus a pair of inexperienced caregivers on our composite outcome. We estimated the average relative effect (ie, the exponentiated average log odds ratio) of receiving anesthesia from an experienced versus inexperienced caregiver pair across the 7 components of the composite outcome using a generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to adjust for between-component correlation and with inverse propensity score weighing to adjust for potential confounding from a host of variables. A total of 8968 patients who received anesthesia care by an experienced pair were compared with 25,361 patients who received care from an inexperienced pair, adjusting for potential confounding. The incidence of composite complications (ie, any component event) was 7.6% (677/8968) for experienced pairs and 12% (2976/25,361) for inexperienced pairs (P < .001). Care by experienced pairs of caregivers was associated with lower odds of the composite outcome with an estimated average relative effect odds ratio across the individual components of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.71), P < .001. Among the 7 components of the primary outcome, experienced pairs of providers had significantly lower estimated odds of bleeding, infection, and mortality. Anesthesia care by experienced pairs was associated with fewer bleeding complications, fewer infections, shorter hospitalization, and reduced in-hospital mortality.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Anesthesiologists typically care for patients having a broad range of procedures. Outcomes might be improved when care is provided by caregivers experienced in particular types of surgery. We tested the hypothesis that intraoperative care provided by pairs of anesthesia caregivers having significant experience with a particular type of surgery reduces a composite of in-hospital death and 6 serious complications, including bleeding, cardiac, gastrointestinal, infectious, respiratory, and urinary complications, compared to care provided by pairs of anesthesia caregivers with less experience.
METHODS
We included patients having surgery lasting at least 30 minutes. Using cluster analysis, attending anesthesiologists, and Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs) were identified as experienced or inexperienced caregivers for each type of surgery at the case level. We then compared surgeries for which anesthesia was provided by a pair of experienced caregivers versus a pair of inexperienced caregivers on our composite outcome. We estimated the average relative effect (ie, the exponentiated average log odds ratio) of receiving anesthesia from an experienced versus inexperienced caregiver pair across the 7 components of the composite outcome using a generalized estimating equation (GEE) model to adjust for between-component correlation and with inverse propensity score weighing to adjust for potential confounding from a host of variables.
RESULTS
A total of 8968 patients who received anesthesia care by an experienced pair were compared with 25,361 patients who received care from an inexperienced pair, adjusting for potential confounding. The incidence of composite complications (ie, any component event) was 7.6% (677/8968) for experienced pairs and 12% (2976/25,361) for inexperienced pairs (P < .001). Care by experienced pairs of caregivers was associated with lower odds of the composite outcome with an estimated average relative effect odds ratio across the individual components of 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-0.71), P < .001. Among the 7 components of the primary outcome, experienced pairs of providers had significantly lower estimated odds of bleeding, infection, and mortality.
CONCLUSIONS
Anesthesia care by experienced pairs was associated with fewer bleeding complications, fewer infections, shorter hospitalization, and reduced in-hospital mortality.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33433116
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000005318
pii: 00000539-202103000-00035
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
866-877Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 International Anesthesia Research Society.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Références
Ericsson KA, Krampe RT, Tesch-Romer C. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol Rev. 1993;100:363–406.
Sadideen H, Alvand A, Saadeddin M, Kneebone R. Surgical experts: born or made? Int J Surg. 2013;11:773–778.
von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:344–349.
Austin PC, Stuart EA. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat Med. 2015;34:3661–3679.
Schulte PJ, Mascha EJ. Propensity score methods: theory and practice for anesthesia research. Anesth Analg. 2018;127:1074–1084.
Austin PC. Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples. Stat Med. 2009;28:3083–3107.
Saager L, Hesler BD, You J, et al. Intraoperative transitions of anesthesia care and postoperative adverse outcomes. Anesthesiology. 2014;121:695–706.
Mascha EJ, Imrey PB. Factors affecting power of tests for multiple binary outcomes. Stat Med. 2010;29:2890–2904.
Mascha EJ, Sessler DI. Design and analysis of binary-event composite endpoint studies: guidelines for anesthesia research. Anesth Analg. 2011;112:1461–1471.
Walsh SR, Bhutta H, Tang TY, et al. Anaesthetic specialisation leads to improved early- and medium-term survival following major vascular surgery. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010;39:719–725.
Hofer I, Spivack J, Yaport M, et al. Association between anesthesiologist experience and mortality after orthotopic liver transplantation. Liver Transpl. 2015;21:89–95.
Lubarsky DA, Reves JG. Effect of subspecialty organization of an academic department of anesthesiology on faculty perceptions of the workplace. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201:434–437.
Dexter F, Epstein RH, Dutton RP, et al. Diversity and similarity of anesthesia procedures in the United States during and among regular work hours, evenings, and weekends. Anesth Analg. 2016;123:1567–1573.
Abenstein JP, Warner MA. Anesthesia providers, patient outcomes, and costs. Anesth Analg. 1996;82:1273–1283.
Dony P, Seidel L, Pirson M, Forget P. Anaesthesia care team improves outcomes in surgical patients compared with solo anaesthesiologist: an observational study. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2019;36:64–69.
Bilimoria KY, Phillips JD, Rock CE, Hayman A, Prystowsky JB, Bentrem DJ. Effect of surgeon training, specialization, and experience on outcomes for cancer surgery: a systematic review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:1799–1808.
Boudourakis LD, Wang TS, Roman SA, Desai R, Sosa JA. Evolution of the surgeon-volume, patient-outcome relationship. Ann Surg. 2009;250:159–165.
Yeo HL, Abelson JS, Mao J, O’Mahoney PR, Milsom JW, Sedrakyan A. Surgeon annual and cumulative volumes predict early postoperative outcomes after rectal cancer resection. Ann Surg. 2016;265:151–157.
Di Carlo A, Andtbacka RH, Shrier I, et al. The value of specialization–is there an outcome difference in the management of fistulas complicating diverticulitis. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44:1456–1463.
Gervaz P, Bucher P, Scheiwiller A, Mugnier-Konrad B, Morel P. The duration of postoperative ileus after elective colectomy is correlated to surgical specialization. Int J Colorectal Dis. 2006;21:542–546.
Pranikoff T, Campbell BT, Travis J, Hirschl RB. Differences in outcome with subspecialty care: pyloromyotomy in North Carolina. J Pediatr Surg. 2002;37:352–356.
Doll D, Kauf P, Wieferich K, Schiffer R, Luedi MM. Implications of perioperative team setups for operating room management decisions. Anesth Analg. 2017;124:262–269.