Can anesthesia information management systems improve quality in the surgical suite?

Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

Volumn 22, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 215-222

  Balust, Jaume ^a   MacArio, Alex ^b  

^a HOSPITAL CLÍNIC   (Spain)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Adverse incidents; Anesthesia information management system; Computerized decision support; Quality assurance; Quality improvement

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT;

ACCURACY; ANESTHESIA; ANESTHESIA INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION SYSTEM; MEDICAL RECORD; PATIENT CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY CONTROL; REVIEW; SURGICAL WARD; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; VITAL SIGN;

ANESTHESIOLOGY; DECISION MAKING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; HUMANS; INFORMATION MANAGEMENT; OPERATING ROOM INFORMATION SYSTEMS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE;

EID: 68049113594     PISSN: 09527907     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/ACO.0b013e328324b9e6     Document Type: Review

References (46)

1. Blumenthal D, Glaser JP. Information technology comes to medicine. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:2527-2534.
2. Macario A, Morris D, Morris S. Initial clinical evaluation of a handheld device for detecting retained surgical gauze sponges using radiofrequency identi-fication technology. Arch Surg 2006; 141:659-662.
3. Steinbrook R. Personally Controlled Online Health Data: the next big thing in medical care? N Engl J Med 2008; 358:1653-1656.
4. Macario A, Vasanawala M. Technology and computing in the surgical suite: key features of an OR management information system and opportunities for the future. Anesth Analg 2002; 95:1120-1121.
5. Epstein RH, Vigoda MM, Feinstein DM. Anesthesia information management systems: a survey of current implementation policies and practices. Anesth Analg 2007; 105:405-411.
6. Egger Halbeis CB, Epstein RH, Macario A, et al. Adoption of anesthesia information management systems by academic departments in the United States. Anesth Analg 2008; 107:1323-1329. This study showed that among adopters of AIMS, the top ranked anticipated benefits were improved clinical documentation, improved data collection for clinical research, enhancement of quality improvement programs, and compliance with requirements of regulatory authorities. The hospital provided funding in almost all facilities (90%), with cofunding by the anesthesia group in 35%.
7. O'Sullivan CT, Dexter F, Lubarsky DA, Vigoda MM. Evidence-based management assessment of return on investment from anesthesia information management systems. AANA J 2007; 75:43-48.
8. Hartzband P, Groopman J. Off the record: avoiding the pitfalls of going electronic. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:1656-1658. This commentary reflects on the fact that the computer should not become a barrier between physician and patient.
9. Sandberg WS. Anesthesia Information Management Systems: almost there. Anesth Analg 2008; 107:1100-1102. This editorial emphasizes that, for data to become knowledge and then decision support for quality improvement, a dedicated biomedical team and programmer is needed to manage the interfaces between the anesthesia equipment/monitors, the AIMS, and the anesthetist.
10. Garvin D. What does 'product quality' really mean. Sloan Manage Rev 1984; 26:25-43.
11. Archer T, Macario A. The drive for operating room efficiency will increase quality of patient care. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2006; 19:171-176.
12. Archer T, Schmiesing C, Macario A. What is quality improvement in the preoperative period? Int Anesthesiol Clin 2002; 40:1-16.
13. Macario A, Vasanawala A. Improving quality of anesthesia care: opportunities for the new decade. Can J Anaesth 2001; 48:6-11.
14. Devitt JH, Rapanos T, Kurrek M, et al. The anesthetic record: accuracy and completeness. Can J Anaesth 1999; 46:122-128.
15. Cook RI, McDonald JS, Nunziata E. Differences between handwritten and automatic blood pressure records. Anesthesiology 1989; 71:385-390.
16. Thrush DN. Are automated anesthesia records better? J Clin Anesth 1992; 4:386-389.
17. Lerou JG, Dirksen R, van Daele M, et al. Automated charting of physiological variables in anesthesia: a quantitative comparison of automated versus handwritten anesthesia records. J Clin Monit 1988; 4:37-47.
18. Reich DL, Wood RK Jr, Mattar R, et al. Arterial blood pressure and heart rate discrepancies between handwritten and computerized anesthesia records. Anesth Analg 2000; 91:612-616.
19. Edsall DW, Deshane P, Giles C, et al. Computerized patient anesthesia records: less time and better quality than manually produced anesthesia records. J Clin Anesth 1993; 5:275-283.
20. Sandberg WS, Sandberg EH, Seim AR, et al. Real-time checking of electronic anesthesia records for documentation errors and automatically text messaging clinicians improves quality of documentation. Anesth Analg 2008; 106:192-201.
21. Vigoda MM, Lubarsky DA. Failure to recognize loss of incoming data in an anesthesia record-keeping system may have increased medical liability. Anesth Analg 2006; 102:1798-1802.
22. Vigoda MM, Lubarsky DA. The medicolegal importance of enhancing timeliness of documentation when using an anesthesia information system and the response to automated feedback in an academic practice. Anesth Analg 2006; 103:131-136.
23. Xiao Y, Hu P, Hu H, et al. An algorithm for processing vital sign monitoring data to remotely identify operating room occupancy in real-time. Anesth Analg 2005; 101:823-829.
24. Macario A. Are your hospital operating rooms 'efficient'? A scoring system with eight performance indicators. Anesthesiology 2006; 105:237-240.
25. Driscoll WD, Columbia MA, Peterfreund RA. An observational study of anesthesia record completeness using an anesthesia information management system. Anesth Analg 2007; 104:1454-1461.
26. Fasting S, Gisvold SE. Statistical process control methods allow the analysis and improvement of anesthesia care. Can J Anesth 2003; 50: 767-774.
27. Kluger MT, Bullock MFM. Recovery room incidents: a review of 419 reports from Anaesthetic Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS). Anaesthesia 2002; 57:1060-1066.
28. Vigoda MM, Gencorelli F, Lubarsky DA. Changing medical group behaviors: increasing the rate of documentation quality assurance events using an anesthesia information system. Anesth Analg 2006; 103:390-395.
29. Sanborn KV, Castro J, Kuroda M, Thys DM. Detection of intraoperative incidents by electronic scanning of computerized anesthesia records. Comparison with voluntary reporting. Anesthesiology 1996; 85:977-987.
30. Benson M, Junger A, Fuchs C, et al. Using an anesthesia information management system to prove a deficit in voluntary reporting of adverse events in a quality assurance program. J Clin Monit 2000; 16:211-217.
31. Wax DV, Beilin Y, Levin M, et al. The effect of an interactive visual reminder in an anesthesia information management system on timeliness of prophylactic antibiotic administration. Anesth Analg 2007; 104:1462-1466.
32. O'Reilly M, Talsma AN, Van Riper S, et al. An anesthesia information system designed to provide physician-specific feedback improves timely administration of prophylactic antibiotics. Anesth Analg 2006; 103:908-912.
33. Kooij FO, Klok T, Hollmann MW, et al. Decision support increases guideline adherence for prescribing postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis. Anesth Analg 2008; 106:893-898. The authors reported that, during the control period, 38% of all high-risk patients were prescribed PONV prophylaxis. This increased to 73% during the decisionsupport period of the study.
34. Merry AF, Webster CS, Mathew DJ. A new, safety-oriented, integrated drug administration and automated anesthesia record system. Anesth Analg 2001; 93:385-390.
35. Vigoda MM, Gencorelli FJ, Lubarsky DA. Discrepancies in medication entries between anesthetic and pharmacy records using electronic databases. Anesth Analg 2007; 105:1061-1065.
36. Kahn MG, Kaplan D, Sokol RJ, et al. Configuration challenges: implementing translational research policies in electronic medical records. Acad Med 2007; 82:661-669. This article was not published in an anesthesia journal, but its take home message is poignant. The authors describe a vignette to highlight a number of inconsistencies in the institution's policies, individual interpretations of regulatory intent, and available functionality in the electronic medical record.
37. Wax DB, Reich DL. Changes in utilization of intraoperative laboratory testing associated with the introduction of point-of-care testing devices in an academic department. Anesth Analg 2007; 105:1711-1713.
38. DGAI-Committee. Quality assurance and data processing in anesthetics. Core data quality assurance in anesthetics. Anästh Intensivmed 1993; 34:331-335.
39. Audet AM, Greenfield S, Field M. Medical practice guidelines: current activities and future directions. Ann Intern Med 1990; 113:709-714.
40. Dexter PR, Perkins S, Overhage JM, et al. A computerized reminder system to increase the use of preventive care for hospitalized patients. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:965-970.
41. Cabana MD, Rand CS, Powe NR, et al. Why don't physicians follow clinical practice guidelines? JAMA 1999; 282:1458-1465.
42. Brent CJ. Making it easy to do it right. N Engl J Med 2001; 345:991-993.
43. Bratzler DW, Houck PM, Surgical Infection Prevention Guideline Writers Workgroup. Antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgery: an advisory statement from the National Surgical Infection Prevention Project. Am J Surg 2005; 189:395-404.
44. Meyer R, Beverley AO, Byrick R. Medication error: a leading cause of anesthesia-related morbidity and mortality. Anesthesiology 2007; 107:1033.
45. Orber BA, Chen RJB, Yee DA. Medication errors in anesthetic practice. A survey of 687 practitioners. Can J Anaesth 2001; 48:139-146.
46. Muravchick S, Caldwell JE, Epstein RH, et al. Anesthesia information management system implementation: a practical guide. Anesth Analg 2008; 107: 1598-1608. This review should be read by any practitioner about to purchase and install an AIMS. Authors from multiple institutions that have installed AIMS summarize essential considerations for successful AIMS implementation, including product evaluation, assessment of information technology needs, resource availability, leadership roles, and training.