Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCook, TMen
dc.contributor.authorAndrade, Jen
dc.contributor.authorBogod, DGen
dc.contributor.authorHitchman, JMen
dc.contributor.authorJonker, WRen
dc.contributor.authorLucas, Nen
dc.contributor.authorMackay, JHen
dc.contributor.authorNimmo, AFen
dc.contributor.authorO'Connor, Ken
dc.contributor.authorO'Sullivan, EPen
dc.contributor.authorPaul, RGen
dc.contributor.authorPalmer, JHMGen
dc.contributor.authorPlaat, Fen
dc.contributor.authorRadcliffe, JJen
dc.contributor.authorSury, MRJen
dc.contributor.authorTorevell, HEen
dc.contributor.authorWang, Men
dc.contributor.authorHainsworth, Jen
dc.contributor.authorPandit, JJen
dc.contributor.authorRoyal College of Anaesthetistsen
dc.contributor.authorAssociation of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Irelanden
dc.date.accessioned2016-12-22T12:33:28Z
dc.date.available2016-12-22T12:33:28Z
dc.date.issued2014-10en
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10026.1/8159
dc.description.abstract

The 5th National Audit Project (NAP5) of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland into accidental awareness during general anaesthesia (AAGA) yielded data related to psychological aspects from the patient, and the anaesthetist, perspectives; patients' experiences ranged from isolated auditory or tactile sensations to complete awareness. A striking finding was that 75% of experiences were for <5 min, yet 51% of patients [95% confidence interval (CI) 43-60%] experienced distress and 41% (95% CI 33-50%) suffered longer term adverse effect. Distress and longer term harm occurred across the full range of experiences but were particularly likely when the patient experienced paralysis (with or without pain). The patient's interpretation of what is happening at the time of the awareness seemed central to later impact; explanation and reassurance during suspected AAGA or at the time of report seemed beneficial. Quality of care before the event was judged good in 26%, poor in 39%, and mixed in 31%. Three-quarters of cases of AAGA (75%) were judged preventable. In 12%, AAGA care was judged good and the episode not preventable. The contributory and human factors in the genesis of the majority of cases of AAGA included medication, patient, and education/training. The findings have implications for national guidance, institutional organization, and individual practice. The incidence of 'accidental awareness' during sedation (~1:15,000) was similar to that during general anaesthesia (~1:19,000). The project raises significant issues about information giving and consent for both sedation and anaesthesia. We propose a novel approach to describing sedation from the patient's perspective which could be used in communication and consent. Eight (6%) of the patients had resorted to legal action (12, 11%, to formal complaint) at the time of reporting. NAP5 methodology provides a standardized template that might usefully inform the investigation of claims or serious incidents related to AAGA.

en
dc.format.extent560 - 574en
dc.languageengen
dc.language.isoengen
dc.subjectawarenessen
dc.subjectconsenten
dc.subjectpatient experienceen
dc.subjectsedationen
dc.subjectAnesthesia, Generalen
dc.subjectAnesthesiologyen
dc.subjectCommunicationen
dc.subjectConscious Sedationen
dc.subjectHealth Care Surveysen
dc.subjectHumansen
dc.subjectInformed Consenten
dc.subjectIntraoperative Awarenessen
dc.subjectIrelanden
dc.subjectMedical Errorsen
dc.subjectMemoryen
dc.subjectPhysiciansen
dc.subjectQuality of Health Careen
dc.subjectStress Disorders, Post-Traumaticen
dc.subjectSurveys and Questionnairesen
dc.subjectUnited Kingdomen
dc.title5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia: patient experiences, human factors, sedation, consent, and medicolegal issues.en
dc.typeJournal Article
plymouth.author-urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25204696en
plymouth.issue4en
plymouth.volume113en
plymouth.publication-statusPublisheden
plymouth.journalBr J Anaesthen
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/bja/aeu314en
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/00 Groups by role
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/00 Groups by role/Academics
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health and Human Sciences
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Faculty of Health and Human Sciences/School of Psychology
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/REF 2021 Researchers by UoA/UoA04 Psychology, Psychiatry and Neuroscience
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Centre for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour (CBCB)
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Centre for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour (CBCB)/Cognition
plymouth.organisational-group/Plymouth/Research Groups/Institute of Health and Community
dc.publisher.placeEnglanden
dc.identifier.eissn1471-6771en
dc.rights.embargoperiodNo embargoen
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1093/bja/aeu314en
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://www.rioxx.net/licenses/all-rights-reserveden
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen
plymouth.oa-locationhttp://bja.oxfordjournals.org/content/113/4/560.longen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record


All items in PEARL are protected by copyright law.
Author manuscripts deposited to comply with open access mandates are made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the details provided on the item record or document. In the absence of an open licence (e.g. Creative Commons), permissions for further reuse of content should be sought from the publisher or author.
Theme by 
@mire NV