Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 969 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 11  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 702-712

Referrral systems development and survey of perioperative and critical care referral to anesthetists


1 Department of Anesthesiology, Subbaiah Institute of Medical Sciences, Shivamogga, Karnataka, India
2 Department of Anesthesiology, SDM College of Medical Sciences and Hospital, Dharwad, Karnataka, India
3 Department of Biostatistics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
4 Department of Anesthesiology, Shri BM Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre, BLDE University, Bijapur, Karnataka, India
5 Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, London, United Kingdom

Correspondence Address:
P L Narendra
Department of Anesthesiology, Subbaiah Institute of Medical Sciences, Purale, Shivamogga - 577 222, Karnataka
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0259-1162.207072

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Anesthetists come in contact with more than two-third of hospital patients. Timely referral to anesthetists is vital in perioperative and remote site settings. Delayed referrals, improper referrals, and referrals at inappropriate levels can result in inadequate preparation, perioperative complications, and poor outcome. Methods: The self administered paper survey to delegates attending anesthesia conferences. Questions were asked on how high-risk, emergency surgical cases remote site and critical care patients were referred to anesthetists and presence of rapid response teams. Results: The response rate was 43.8%. Sixty percent (55.3–64.8, P - 0.001) reported high-risk elective cases were referred after admission. Sixty-eight percent (63.42–72.45, P - 0.001) opined preoperative resting echocardiographs were useful. Six percent (4.16–8.98, P - 0.001) reported emergency room referral before arrival of the patient. Twenty-five percent (20.92–29.42, P - 0.001) indicated high-risk obstetric cases were referred immediately after admission. Consultants practiced preoperative stabilization more commonly than residents (32% vs. 22%) (P - 0.004). For emergency surgery, resident referrals occurred after surgery time was fixed (40% vs. 28%) (P - 0.012). Residents dealt with more cases without full investigations in obstetrics (28% vs. 15) (P = 0.002). Remote site patients were commonly referred to residents after sedation attempts (32% vs. 20%) (P = 0.036). Only 34.8 said hosptals where tbey practiced had dedicated cardiac arrest team in place. Conclusions: Anesthetic departments must periodically assess whether subgroups of patients are being referred in line with current guidelines. Cancellations, critical incidents and complications arising out of referral delays, and improper referrals must be recorded as referral incidents and a separate referral incident registry must be maintained in each department. Regular referral audits must be encouraged.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1336    
    Printed18    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded71    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal