Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Journal of Clinical ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Clinical Nursing
Article . 2023 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Comparison of anaesthesia‐related outcomes in patients monitored by newly recruited nurse anaesthetists and anaesthesiologists: An observational study

Authors: Qinqin Cao; Chengjuan Fan; Xiaolei Ren; Shuling Bai; Hemin Dong; Min Wei; Haihong Meng;

Comparison of anaesthesia‐related outcomes in patients monitored by newly recruited nurse anaesthetists and anaesthesiologists: An observational study

Abstract

AbstractAimsTo compare anaesthesia‐related outcomes between patients monitored by newly recruited nurse anaesthetists and those monitored by newly recruited anaesthesiologists.DesignThis was a retrospective study.MethodsWe conducted a retrospective study that collected demographic information on newly recruited nurse anaesthetists and anaesthesiologists between 2017 and 2022 and recorded information on patients within 6 months of monitoring. Postoperative pain, emergency agitation, nausea, and vomiting were designated anaesthesia‐related outcomes. Propensity score matching was used to adjust for covariates. The study adhered to the STROBE guidelines.ResultsThe study's statistical analysis included 4483 patients monitored by 22 newly recruited nurse anaesthetists and 4959 patients monitored by 23 newly recruited anaesthesiologists. Compared with patients monitored by newly trained anaesthesiologists, the patients monitored by nurse anaesthetists were younger (42.07 ± 20.00 vs. 47.39 ± 18.45 years, p < 0.001) and had a lower body mass index (23.56 ± 4.46 vs. 24.19 ± 4.25, p < 0.001). Patients monitored by anaesthesiologists had a greater proportion of women (61.62% vs. 59.25%, p < 0.001), a high proportion of ASA III and ASA IV (17.1% vs. 8.88%, p < 0.001), and a longer mean surgery duration (78.65 ± 59.01 vs. 70.70 ± 60.65 min, p < 0.001). After propensity score matching was used to adjust for covariates, no statistically significant differences were found in the prevalence of postoperative pain, emergency agitation, or postoperative nausea and vomiting between the two groups (p < 0.05).ConclusionNurse anaesthetists monitoring alone during anaesthesia maintenance is feasible and safe. The two groups had no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative pain, emergency agitation, or postoperative nausea and vomiting.Relevance to Clinical PracticeThe shortage of anaesthesiologists leads to heavy work burden and high incidence of occupational burnout among anaesthesiologists. The study found that it was safe for nurse anaesthetists to perform anaesthetic monitoring alone in the operating room under the supervision of the attending anaesthesiologist and did reduce the burden of anaesthesiologists’ work. The results of the current study contribute to the expansion of occupational categories for nurse anaesthetists in countries where anaesthesiologists are in short supply. It provides new ideas for hospital administrators and policy‐makers to formulate medical and nursing service policies.

Related Organizations
Keywords

Postoperative Pain, Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting, Humans, Female, Anesthesia, Nurse Anesthetists, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    3
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
3
Top 10%
Average
Average
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!