Introduction of a rapid sequence induction checklist and its effect on compliance to guidelines and complications

Jakob Zeuchner, Jonas Graf, Louise Elander, Jessica Frisk, Mats Fredrikson, Michelle S Chew, Jakob Zeuchner, Jonas Graf, Louise Elander, Jessica Frisk, Mats Fredrikson, Michelle S Chew

Abstract

Background: Current evidence for the conduct of rapid sequence induction (RSI) is weak. This increases the risk of clinicians modifying the RSI procedure according to personal preferences. Checklists may help increase compliance to best practice guidelines and reduce complication rates. Their value during RSI, a critical procedure in anaesthesia, is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate compliance to local guidelines and frequency of RSI-related complications before and after introduction of an RSI checklist.

Methods: This was a prospective, observational, pre- and post-intervention study conducted at two hospitals. There were two interventions: the first was a standardized educational lecture to all staff at both hospitals, consisting of an educational instruction of the checklist and general information about RSI, and the second intervention was the introduction of a RSI checklist. The checklist consisted of 16 items. Compliance to guidelines was categorized as high, moderate and low, and was assessed pre- and post-intervention. The frequency of RSI-related complications was also measured.

Results: We registered 811 RSI procedures of which 412 were pre-intervention. After intervention, the proportion of procedures with high compliance to RSI guidelines increased from 49% to 70% (P < .001). The proportion with partial and low compliance decreased from 37% to 26% (P < .001) and 13% to 3.3% (P < .001) respectively. No change in RSI-related complication rates was detectable post-intervention (16.6%-16.7% P = .56).

Conclusion: The introduction of a structured RSI checklist significantly increased compliance to RSI guidelines. A change in RSI-related complications could not be detected due to the size of the study. A checklist may be a useful tool to reduce variance during the RSI procedure.

Keywords: Sweden; anaesthetics; checklist; compliance; complications; patient safety; rapid sequence induction.

© 2021 The Authors. Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica Foundation.

References

REFERENCES

    1. Stept WJ, Safar P. Rapid induction-intubation for prevention of gastric-content aspiration. Anesth Analg. 1970;49:633-636.
    1. Jensen AG, Callesen T, Hagemo JS, Hreinsson K, Lund V, Nordmark J. Scandinavian clinical practice guidelines on general anaesthesia for emergency situations. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010;54(8):922-950.
    1. Bell DD, Brindley PG, Forrest D, Al Muslim O, Zygun D. Management following resuscitation from cardiac arrest: recommendations from the 2003 Rocky Mountain Critical Care Conference. Can J Anaesth. 2005;52(3):309-322.
    1. Okubo M, Gibo K, Hagiwara Y, Nakayama Y, Hasegawa K. The effectiveness of rapid sequence intubation (RSI) versus non-RSI in emergency department: an analysis of multicenter prospective observational study. Int J Emerg Med. 2017;10:1.
    1. Andrews JI, Kumar N, van den Brom RH, Olkkola KT, Roest GJ, Wright PM. A large simple randomized trial of rocuronium versus succinylcholine in rapid-sequence induction of anaesthesia along with propofol. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1999;43(1):4-8.
    1. Sakles JC, Augustinovich CC, Patanwala AE, Pacheco GS, Mosier JM. Improvement in the safety of rapid sequence intubation in the emergency department with the use of an airway continuous quality improvement program. West J Emerg Med. 2019;20(4):610-618.
    1. Larsen PB, Hansen EG, Jacobsen LS, et al. Intubation conditions after rocuronium or succinylcholine for rapid sequence induction with alfentanil and propofol in the emergency patient. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2005;22(10):748-753.
    1. Morris J, Cook TM. Rapid sequence induction: a national survey of practice. Anaesthesia. 2001;56:1090-1097.
    1. Thwaites AJ, Rice CP, Smith I. Rapid sequence induction: a questionnaire survey of its routine conduct and continued management during a failed intubation. Anaesthesia. 1999;54(4):376-381.
    1. Groth CM, Acquisto NM, Khadem T. Current practices and safety of medication use during rapid sequence intubation. J Crit Care. 2018;45:65-70.
    1. Klucka J, Kosinova M, Zacharowski K, et al. Rapid sequence induction: an international survey. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2020;37:435-442.
    1. Koerber JP, Roberts GE, Whitaker R, Thorpe CM. Variation in rapid sequence induction techniques: current practice in Wales. Anaesthesia. 2009;64:54-59.
    1. Hinkelbein J, Kranke P. [Rapid sequence induction] Anasthesiol Intensivmed Notfallmed Schmerzther. 2018;53(9):631-634.
    1. Wetsch WA, Hinkelbein J. Current national recommendations on rapid sequence induction in Europe. How standardised is the 'standard of care'? Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2014;31:443-444.
    1. Pugel AE, Simianu VV, Flum DR, Dellinger EP. Use of the surgical safety checklist to improve communication and reduce complications. J Infect and Public Health. 2015;8(3):219-225.
    1. Hannam JA, Glass L, Kwon J, et al. A prospective, observational study of the effects of implementation strategy on compliance with a surgical safety checklist. BMJ Qual Saf. 2013;22(11):940-947.
    1. Rakoff D, Akella K, Guruvegowda C, Chhajwani S, Seshadri S, Sola S. Improved compliance and comprehension of a surgical safety checklist with customized versus standard training: a randomized trial. J Patient Saf. 2018;14(3):138-142.
    1. Haugen AS, Waehle HV, Almeland SK, et al. Causal analysis of World Health Organization's surgical safety checklist implementation quality and impact on care processes and patient outcomes: secondary analysis from a large stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in Norway. Ann Surg. 2019;269(2):283-290.
    1. Walker IA, Reshamwalla S, Wilson IH. Surgical safety checklists: do they improve outcomes? Br J Anaesth. 2012;109(1):47-54.
    1. Wetsch WA, Hinkelbein J. Recommendations for rapid sequence induction in Europe - how standardized is the standard of care?: 19AP5-9. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2013;30:265-365.
    1. Katz DL, Wild D, Elmore JG, Lucan SC. Jekel's Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Preventive Medicine. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2013.
    1. Mort TC. Complications of emergency tracheal intubation: hemodynamic alterations-part I. J Intensive Care Med. 2007;22(3):157-165.
    1. Cook TM, Woodall N, Frerk C. Major complications of airway management in the UK: results of the Fourth National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Difficult Airway Society. Part 1: anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth. 2011;106(5):617-631.
    1. Haugen AS, Waehle HV, Almeland SK, et al. Causal analysis of World Health Organization's surgical safety checklist implementation quality and impact on care processes and patient outcomes: secondary analysis from a large stepped wedge cluster randomized controlled trial in Norway. Ann Surg. 2019;269(2):283-290.
    1. Ehrenfeld JM, Cassedy EA, Forbes VE, Mercaldo ND, Sandberg WS. Modified rapid sequence induction and intubation: a survey of United States current practice. Anesth Analg. 2012;115(1):95-101.
    1. Sajayan A, Wicker J, Ungureanu N, Mendonca C, Kimani PK. Current practice of rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia in the UK - a national survey. Br J Anaesth. 2016;117(Suppl 1):i69-i74.
    1. Catchpole K, Russ S. The problem with checklists. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015;24(9):545-549.
    1. Kluge A, Frank B. Counteracting skill decay: four refresher interventions and their effect on skill and knowledge retention in a simulated process control task. Ergonomics. 2014;57(2):175-190.
    1. Arthur W Jr, Bennett W Jr, Stanush PL, McNelly TL. Factors that influence skill decay and retention: a quantitative review and analysis. Hum Perform. 1998;11(1):57-101.
    1. Sullivan A, Elshenawy S, Ades A, Sawyer T. Acquiring and maintaining technical skills using simulation: initial, maintenance, booster, and refresher training. Cureus. 2019;11:e5729.
    1. Baraka AS, Taha SK, Aouad MT, El-Khatib MF, Kawkabani NI. Preoxygenation: comparison of maximal breathing and tidal volume breathing techniques. Anesthesiology. 1999;91(3):612-616.
    1. Wickström G, Bendix T. The, "Hawthorne effect" - what did the original Hawthorne studies actually show? Scand J Work Environ Health. 2000;26:363-367.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores y Colaboradores

Condiciones médicas

Intervenciones de drogas

3
Suscribir