4.5 Article

Association of Anesthesiologist Staffing Ratio With Surgical Patient Morbidity and Mortality

Journal

JAMA SURGERY
Volume 157, Issue 9, Pages 807-815

Publisher

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.2804

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Department of Anesthesiology, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor
  2. National Institute of General Medical Sciences of the NIH [T32GM103730]
  3. BCBSM/Blue Care Network, BCBSM/Blue Care Network Value Partnerships program

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study examines the association between different levels of anesthesiologist staffing ratios and surgical patient morbidity and mortality. The findings suggest that increasing overlapping coverage by anesthesiologists is associated with increased surgical patient morbidity and mortality.
IMPORTANCE Recent studies have investigated the effect of overlapping surgeon responsibilities or nurse to patient staffing ratios on patient outcomes, but the association of overlapping anesthesiologist responsibilities with patient outcomes remains unexplored to our knowledge. OBJECTIVE To examine the association between different levels of anesthesiologist staffing ratios and surgical patient morbidity and mortality. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS A retrospective, matched cohort study consisting of major noncardiac inpatient surgical procedures performed from January 1, 2010, to October 31, 2017, was conducted in 23 US academic and private hospitals. A total of 866 453 adult patients (aged >= 18 years) undergoing major inpatient surgery within the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group electronic health record registry were included. Anesthesiologist sign-in and sign-out times were used to calculate a continuous time-weighted average staffing ratio variable for each operation. Propensity score-matching methods were applied to create balanced sample groups with respect to patient-, operative-, and hospital-level confounders and resulted in 4 groups based on anesthesiologist staffing ratio. Groups consisted of patients receiving care from an anesthesiologist covering 1 operation (group 1), more than 1 to no more than 2 overlapping operations (group 1-2), more than 2 to no more than 3 overlapping operations (group 2-3), and more than 3 to no more than 4 overlapping operations (group 3-4). Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to October 2021. EXPOSURE Undergoing a major inpatient surgical operation that involved an anesthesiologist providing care for up to 4 overlapping operations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary composite outcome was 30-day mortality and 6 major surgical morbidities (cardiac, respiratory, gastrointestinal, urinary, bleeding, and infectious complications) derived from International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision and International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision discharge diagnosis codes. RESULTS In all, 578 815 adult patients (mean [SD] age, 55.7 [16.2] years; 55.1% female) were analyzed. After matching operations according to anesthesiologist staffing ratio, 48 555 patients were in group 1; 247 057, group 1-2; 216193, group 2-3; and 67 010. group 3-4. Increasing anesthesiologist coverage responsibilities was associated with an increase in risk-adjusted surgical patient morbidity and mortality. Compared with patients in group 1-2, those in group 2-3 had a 4% relative increase in risk-adjusted mortality and morbidity (5.06% vs 5.25%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.04; 95% CI, 1.01-1.08; P = .02) and those in group 3-4 had a 14% increase in risk-adjusted mortality and morbidity (5.06% vs 5.75%; AOR, 1.15; 95% CI, 1.09-1.21; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE This study's findings suggest that increasing overlapping coverage by anesthesiologists is associated with increased surgical patient morbidity and mortality. Therefore, the potential effects of staffing ratios in perioperative team models should be considered in clinical coverage efforts.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available