Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T06:03:52.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Anaesthetic machine checking guidelines: have we improved our practice?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 December 2007

R. Langford ,
T. C. E. Gale  and
A. H. Mayor
R. Langford*
Affiliation:
Royal Cornwall Hospital, Anaesthetic Department, Truro, Cornwall
T. C. E. Gale
Affiliation:
Derriford Hospital, Anaesthetic Department, Plymouth, Devon, UK
A. H. Mayor
Affiliation:
Derriford Hospital, Anaesthetic Department, Plymouth, Devon, UK
*
Correspondence to: Dr Roger Langford, Anaesthetic Department, Royal Cornwall Hospital, Truro, Cornwall TR1 3LJ, UK. E-mail: rogerlangford@doctors.org.uk; Tel: +44 1872 253132; Fax: +44 1872 252480
Get access

Summary

Background and objectives

This study follows up an initial audit in 1992 indicating that anaesthetic machine checking practices were often incomplete. The aims were to ascertain if there has been any improvement during this period with special reference to the latest guidelines.

Methods

Following the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland machine checking guidelines, a structured questionnaire, was used to interview 41 anaesthetists in the South West region on one particular day.

Results

Despite 80% of subjects stating that they had read the latest guidelines recently, only one undertook a complete check and 39/41 (95%) performed partial checks (omitting one or more steps in the guidelines). Steps most commonly omitted were additional monitoring, ventilator function, availability of an alternative means of ventilation and function of ancillary equipment such as laryngoscopes. Only 5/41 subjects performed any check between cases. Several of these checks have been introduced in the 2004 guidelines.

Conclusions

Although there has been a significant increase in the proportion of anaesthetists undertaking machine checks since 1992 (P = 0.0007), we conclude that machine checking guidelines are still poorly followed, with checks specific to the latest guidelines most likely to be omitted.

Keywords

EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIESEQUIPMENT SAFETYANAESTHESIAGUIDELINES
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 24 , Issue 12 , December 2007 , pp. 1050 - 1056
Copyright
Copyright © European Society of Anaesthesiology 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

Presented in part at the Association of Anaesthetists Annual Congress, Manchester 20/09/05.

References

1.Mayor, AH, Eaton, JM. Anaesthetic machine checking practices. A survey. Anaesthesia 1992; 47: 866–868.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Checking anaesthetic equipment 3 2004. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland, 9 Bedford Square, London WC1B 3RA.Google Scholar
3.Russell, WJ, Webb, RK, van der Walt, JH, Runciman, WB. Problems with ventilation: an analysis of 2000 incident reports. Anaesth Intens Care 1993; 21: 617–620.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Abeysekera, A, Bergman, IJ, Kluger, MT, Short, TG. Drug error in anaesthetic practice: a review of 896 reports from the Australian Incident Monitoring Study database. Anaesthesia 2005; 60: 220–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Webb, RK, van der Walt, JH, Runciman, WB et al. . The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. Which monitor? An analysis of 2000 incident reports. Anaesth Intens Care 1993; 21: 529–542.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Aziz, E. Failure of Datex AS/3 anaesthesia delivery unit. Anaesthesia 2000; 55: 1214–1215.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Langford, RA. All in the name of progress. Anaesthesia 2002; 57: 313.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Carter, JA. Checking anaesthetic equipment and the Expert Group on Blocked Anaesthetic Tubing (EGBAT). Anaesthesia 2004; 59: 105–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Newnam, PTF. Another faulty catheter mount: now you see it now you don’t. Anaesthesia 2001; 56: 699–700.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Babarczy, A. Checking the anaesthetic machine. Anaesth Intens Care 1994; 22: 497.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Thorpe, CM. Plastic in the anaesthetic circuit. Anaesthesia 2002; 57: 85–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Aarhus, D, Soreide, E, Holst-Larsen, H. Mechanical obstruction in the anaesthesia delivery-system mimicking severe bronchospasm. Anaesthesia 1997; 52: 992–994.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Infection control in anaesthesia. 2002. Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland, 9 Bedford Square, London WC1B 3RA.Google Scholar
14.Hart, EM, Owen, H. Errors and omissions in anaesthesia: a pilot study using a pilot’s checklist. Anesth Analg 2005; 101: 246–250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Beatty, PCW, Beatty, SF. Anaesthetists’ intentions to violate safety guidelines. Anaesthesia 2004; 59: 528–540.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Morris, GP, Morris, RW. Anaesthesia and fatigue: an analysis of the first 10 years of the Australian Incident Monitoring Study 1987–1997. Anaesth Intens Care 2000; 28: 300–304.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.http://www.aagbi.org/publications/guidelines/docs/checklista404.pdfGoogle Scholar