Anaesthesia, critical care & pain medicine · 2017
Dental injury associated with anaesthesia: An 8-year database analysis of 592 claims from a major French insurance company.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Giraudon Antoine, de Saint Maurice Guillaume, Biais Matthieu, Benhamou Dan, Nouette-Gaulain Karine
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Dental injury is the most common incident associated with anaesthesia. Regarding recent recommendations on informed consent and changes in airway management practices, a large series of claims related to dental injury has not been recently described. The aim of this study was to analyse a recent database in order to describe the characteristics of dental injury in France.
METHODS: A database that prospectively collected claims reported to Le Sou Médical-MACSF between January 2003 and December 2010, was analysed. Five hundred and ninety-two cases were reported. The following characteristics were analysed: number and type of teeth injured, mechanism of injury, anaesthetic procedure, risk factors and dental outcome after injury.
RESULTS: Amongst the 1514 claims related to anaesthesia, 592 (39.2%) were classified as dental damage. Preoperative informed consent concerning possible perioperative dental injury was documented in only 34.8% of patients. Only one tooth was affected in 65.2% of patients, dental bridge injury in 12.8% of cases and damage to two or more teeth in 14% of patients. Incisors were involved in 50% of cases. Fracture was the most common type of injury (64.2%). Poor dentition was the most common risk factor (23.1%) followed by difficult intubation (15.4%). Both risks were combined in only 7.6% of cases. Tracheal intubation was the highest risk procedure (41.6%).
CONCLUSION: Dental injury remains the most common anaesthesia-related claim. Dental examination and documentation in patient medical files requires improvement and better informed consent on dental injury risk needs to be provided to patients.
METHODS: A database that prospectively collected claims reported to Le Sou Médical-MACSF between January 2003 and December 2010, was analysed. Five hundred and ninety-two cases were reported. The following characteristics were analysed: number and type of teeth injured, mechanism of injury, anaesthetic procedure, risk factors and dental outcome after injury.
RESULTS: Amongst the 1514 claims related to anaesthesia, 592 (39.2%) were classified as dental damage. Preoperative informed consent concerning possible perioperative dental injury was documented in only 34.8% of patients. Only one tooth was affected in 65.2% of patients, dental bridge injury in 12.8% of cases and damage to two or more teeth in 14% of patients. Incisors were involved in 50% of cases. Fracture was the most common type of injury (64.2%). Poor dentition was the most common risk factor (23.1%) followed by difficult intubation (15.4%). Both risks were combined in only 7.6% of cases. Tracheal intubation was the highest risk procedure (41.6%).
CONCLUSION: Dental injury remains the most common anaesthesia-related claim. Dental examination and documentation in patient medical files requires improvement and better informed consent on dental injury risk needs to be provided to patients.