Nursing research · 2007
Anesthesia staffing and anesthetic complications during cesarean delivery: a retrospective analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Simonson Daniel C, Ahern Melissa M, Hendryx Michael S
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Obstetrical anesthesia services may be provided by Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists (CRNAs), anesthesiologists, or a combination of the two providers. Research is needed to assist hospitals and anesthesia groups in making cost-effective staffing choices.
OBJECTIVES: To identify differences in the rates of anesthetic complications in hospitals whose obstetrical anesthesia is provided solely by CRNAs compared to hospitals with only anesthesiologists.
METHODS: Washington State hospital discharge data were obtained from 1993 to 2004 for all cesarean sections, and were merged with a survey of hospital obstetrical anesthesia staffing. Anesthetic complications were identified via International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) diagnosis codes. Resulting rates were risk-adjusted using regression analysis.
RESULTS: Hospitals with CRNA-only staffing had a lower rate of anesthetic complications than those with anesthesiologist staffing (0.58% vs. 0.76%, p=.0006). However, after regression analysis, this difference was not significant (odds ratio for CRNA vs. anesthesiologist complications: 1.046 to 1, 95% confidence interval 0.649-1.658, p=.85).
DISCUSSION: There is no difference in rates of complications between the two types of staffing models. As a result, hospitals and anesthesiology groups may safely examine other variables, such as provider availability and costs, when staffing for obstetrical anesthesia. Further study is needed to validate the use of ICD-9-CM codes for anesthesia complications as an indicator of quality.
OBJECTIVES: To identify differences in the rates of anesthetic complications in hospitals whose obstetrical anesthesia is provided solely by CRNAs compared to hospitals with only anesthesiologists.
METHODS: Washington State hospital discharge data were obtained from 1993 to 2004 for all cesarean sections, and were merged with a survey of hospital obstetrical anesthesia staffing. Anesthetic complications were identified via International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) diagnosis codes. Resulting rates were risk-adjusted using regression analysis.
RESULTS: Hospitals with CRNA-only staffing had a lower rate of anesthetic complications than those with anesthesiologist staffing (0.58% vs. 0.76%, p=.0006). However, after regression analysis, this difference was not significant (odds ratio for CRNA vs. anesthesiologist complications: 1.046 to 1, 95% confidence interval 0.649-1.658, p=.85).
DISCUSSION: There is no difference in rates of complications between the two types of staffing models. As a result, hospitals and anesthesiology groups may safely examine other variables, such as provider availability and costs, when staffing for obstetrical anesthesia. Further study is needed to validate the use of ICD-9-CM codes for anesthesia complications as an indicator of quality.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AdolescentAdultAnesthesia Department, HospitalAnesthesia, ObstetricalCesarean SectionCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHealth Care CostsHumansIncidenceIntraoperative ComplicationsNurse AnesthetistsOutcome Assessment, Health CarePersonnel Staffing and SchedulingPregnancyRegression AnalysisRetrospective StudiesRisk AdjustmentSafetyWashingtonWorkforce