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

Author:

Cao Qinqin1,Fan Chengjuan2,Ren Xiaolei3,Bai Shuling1,Dong Hemin1,Wei Min4,Meng Haihong1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anaesthesiology Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Jining Shandong China

2. Department of Nephrology Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Jining Shandong China

3. Data Centre Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Jining Shandong China

4. Medical Consortium Service Centre Affiliated Hospital of Jining Medical University Jining Shandong China

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.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

General Medicine,General Nursing

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3