■在医疗保健成本不断上升和对资源优化的日益关注的背景下,这项审计研究深入研究了麻醉管理领域,具体探索低流量麻醉(LFA)的应用。主要目标是评估对医院标准的依从性,并评估LFA(<1L/min)的经济影响。
■这项回顾性审核的重点是700名接受全身麻醉择期手术的成年患者。数据来源包括麻醉记录,电子记录系统,并由专门的团队进行审计。新鲜气体流量(FGFRs),最低肺泡浓度(MAC),并对挥发性麻醉药用量进行分析。进行了低流量和高流量麻醉的成本比较。采用特定的每毫升成本指标。
■发现维持阶段期间的平均FGFR为0.45±0.88L/min。对医院标准的遵守程度非常高,94.29%的患者维持低流量气体速率。低流量和高流量FGFR的麻醉消耗量差异在地氟醚(12.17±10.84ml/MAC小时与43.12±27.25ml/MAC小时)和七氟醚(3.48±7.22ml/MAC小时与5.20±5.20ml/MAC小时,P<0.001)。与高流量相比,低流量地氟醚和七氟醚麻醉的每位患者的计算节省为109.25AED和6.74AED。分别。
■这项审计倡导广泛采用LFA作为标准做法。除了符合医院标准,这项研究强调了LFA的多方面好处,包括经济储蓄,环境安全,加强病人护理。
UNASSIGNED: In the backdrop of escalating healthcare costs and an increasing focus on resource optimization, this audit
study delves into the realm of anesthesia management, specifically exploring the application of low-flow anesthesia (LFA). The primary objective was to assess adherence to hospital standards and evaluate the economic implications of LFA (<1 L/min).
UNASSIGNED: This retrospective audit focused on 700 adult patients undergoing elective surgeries with general anesthesia. Data sources included anesthesia records, electronic recording systems, and audits by a dedicated team. Fresh gas flow rates (FGFRs), minimum alveolar concentration (MAC), and volatile anesthetic consumption were analyzed. Cost comparisons between low-flow and high-flow anesthesia were conducted, employing specific cost per milliliter metrics.
UNASSIGNED: The average FGFR during the maintenance phase was found to be 0.45 ± 0.88 L/min. Adherence to hospital standards was notably high, with 94.29% of patients being maintained on low-flow gas rates. The differences in anesthetic consumption between low-flow and high-flow FGFR were statistically significant for both desflurane (12.17 ± 10.84 ml/MAC hour versus 43.12 ± 27.25 ml/MAC hour) and sevoflurane (3.48 ± 7.22 ml/MAC hour versus 5.20 ± 5.20 ml/MAC hour, P < 0.001). The calculated savings per patient with low-flow desflurane and sevoflurane anesthesia compared to high flow were found to be 109.25 AED and 6.74 AED, respectively.
UNASSIGNED: This audit advocates for the widespread adoption of LFA as a standard practice. Beyond aligning with hospital standards, the
study highlights the multi-faceted benefits of LFA, encompassing economic savings, environmental safety, and enhanced patient care.