Keeping vigil over the profession: a grounded theory of the context of nurse anaesthesia practice

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Nurse anaesthetists in the US have faced continued, repeated challenges to their profession. Regardless, they have met these challenges and have established themselves as major anaesthesia care providers. In this paper we address the research question: How do certified registered nurse anaesthetists (CRNAs) manage the socio-political context in which they provide care for their patients?</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Grounded theory was used to explore how nurse anaesthetists protect and promote their profession. Purposive, snowball, and theoretical sampling was used and data were collected through participant observation and interviews conducted at a conference of the professional association, an educational program, by telephone, email exchanges, and time spent in operating rooms and an outpatient surgical clinic. Analysis included coding at increasingly abstract levels and constant comparison.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The basic social process identified was Keeping Vigil Over the Profession, which explains how nurse anaesthetists protect and promote their profession. It is comprised of three contextual categories: Establishing Public Credibility through regulatory and educational standards, Political Vigilance and taking action in governmental and policy arenas, and Tending the Flock through a continuous information loop between local and administrative/political levels.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>From our study of the context of nurse anaesthesia practice, it is clear that CRNAs are dedicated to protecting their ability to provide high quality patient care by maintaining constant vigilance over their profession.</p

Mortality and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing surgery with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection: an international cohort study

Background: The impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) on postoperative recovery needs to be understood to inform clinical decision making during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. This study reports 30-day mortality and pulmonary complication rates in patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection. Methods: This international, multicentre, cohort study at 235 hospitals in 24 countries included all patients undergoing surgery who had SARS-CoV-2 infection confirmed within 7 days before or 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome measure was 30-day postoperative mortality and was assessed in all enrolled patients. The main secondary outcome measure was pulmonary complications, defined as pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, or unexpected postoperative ventilation. Findings: This analysis includes 1128 patients who had surgery between Jan 1 and March 31, 2020, of whom 835 (74·0%) had emergency surgery and 280 (24·8%) had elective surgery. SARS-CoV-2 infection was confirmed preoperatively in 294 (26·1%) patients. 30-day mortality was 23·8% (268 of 1128). Pulmonary complications occurred in 577 (51·2%) of 1128 patients; 30-day mortality in these patients was 38·0% (219 of 577), accounting for 81·7% (219 of 268) of all deaths. In adjusted analyses, 30-day mortality was associated with male sex (odds ratio 1·75 [95% CI 1·28–2·40], p\textless0·0001), age 70 years or older versus younger than 70 years (2·30 [1·65–3·22], p\textless0·0001), American Society of Anesthesiologists grades 3–5 versus grades 1–2 (2·35 [1·57–3·53], p\textless0·0001), malignant versus benign or obstetric diagnosis (1·55 [1·01–2·39], p=0·046), emergency versus elective surgery (1·67 [1·06–2·63], p=0·026), and major versus minor surgery (1·52 [1·01–2·31], p=0·047). Interpretation: Postoperative pulmonary complications occur in half of patients with perioperative SARS-CoV-2 infection and are associated with high mortality. Thresholds for surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic should be higher than during normal practice, particularly in men aged 70 years and older. Consideration should be given for postponing non-urgent procedures and promoting non-operative treatment to delay or avoid the need for surgery. Funding: National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland, Bowel and Cancer Research, Bowel Disease Research Foundation, Association of Upper Gastrointestinal Surgeons, British Association of Surgical Oncology, British Gynaecological Cancer Society, European Society of Coloproctology, NIHR Academy, Sarcoma UK, Vascular Society for Great Britain and Ireland, and Yorkshire Cancer Research