Khan Mueen Ullah, Khan Fauzia Anis
Department of Anaesthesia, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2011 Apr;21(4):234-6.
Quality and safety in anesthesia is usually monitored by analysis of perioperative mortality-morbidity and incidents. Clinical quality indicator, death within 48 hours of anaesthesia exposure is considered to be a flag that can alert to possible problems in individual patient care. The measurement of perioperative mortality as a quality indicator is a continuous peer reviewed quality improvement activity. Medical records and morbidity and mortality files were reviewed to see the trends and finding the benchmark of mortality in ASA-1 and 2 patient who died between 1992-2006 within 48 hours of anaesthesia exposure. Mortality in class 1 was nil. Anaesthetic mortality in ASA-1 and 2 patients was 0.35 per 10,000 and 0.74 per 10,000 of ASA-2 patient's volume. Anaesthesia-related mortality was 0.17 per 10,000 and 0.37 per 10,000 of ASA-2 patient's volume which is almost double of the overall calculated incidence. We suggest continuing monitoring of anaesthesia related mortality as a continuous quality indicator in developing countries. The reporting and analyzing of data according to the ASA status volume should be taken as a denominator. The available benchmark will help in evaluating the confounding factors and perioperative care of a particular group of patients.
麻醉质量与安全通常通过围手术期死亡率、发病率及事件分析来监测。临床质量指标“麻醉暴露后48小时内死亡”被视为一个警示信号,可提醒注意个体患者护理中可能存在的问题。将围手术期死亡率作为质量指标进行测量是一项持续的、经过同行评审的质量改进活动。回顾病历以及发病率和死亡率文件,以查看1992年至2006年间在麻醉暴露后48小时内死亡的ASA-1和2级患者的死亡率趋势并确定其基准。1级患者死亡率为零。ASA-1和2级患者的麻醉死亡率分别为每10000例中有0.35例和每10000例ASA-2级患者中有0.74例。与麻醉相关的死亡率分别为每10000例中有0.17例和每10000例ASA-2级患者中有0.37例,几乎是总体计算发病率的两倍。我们建议在发展中国家继续将与麻醉相关的死亡率作为持续质量指标进行监测。应将根据ASA状态量报告和分析的数据作为分母。现有的基准将有助于评估特定患者群体的混杂因素和围手术期护理情况。