PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 1447537

AxAudit--anaesthetic audit system.

Abstract

A bar code based computerised anaesthetic audit system is described. The system consists of a data entry and validation module resident on a remote hand-held computer and a central database module resident on a desktop computer, capable of conducting extensive searches, analysis, graphing and reporting of captured data. Information is entered into the computer by 'swiping' a bar code reader across required bar codes. Information entered is constantly validated and the computer ensures a minimum data set is captured for every patient. Since data is transferred directly into a computer at the point of clinical activity, a large data set can be presented to the clinician, ensuring as complete a patient record as possible and avoiding the problems associated with traditional form-filling and the subsequent transfer of information onto a computer. The hand-held computer has data cards which can hold information on approximately 200 patients. These cards can be inserted directly into a card reader attached to a desktop computer, thus automating the process of data transfer. The AxSys Anaesthetic Audit system, AxAudit, is a bar code based, computerised audit system developed with the aim of executing effective audit in the course of normal clinical activity.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

G P Ramayya. 1992. AxAudit--anaesthetic audit system.. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01145167

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Perception of training needs and opportunities in advanced airway skills: a survey of British and Irish trainees.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We surveyed delegates at the Group of Anaesthetists in Training (UK) meeting to investigate evidence of a training-gap (number of fibreoptic intubations believed to bestow competence vs. number actually performed). METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed to and collected from delegates in person. Questions covered six areas, including experience of fibreoptic intubation and cricothyrotomy, fibreoptic intubation as a specialist skill and ethical issues. RESULTS: We received 221 replies (76%). All trainees believed competence to be achievable with 10 intubations (interquartile range (IQR) 10-20); the median number performed was 2 (IQR 0-4). This was statistically significant for the groups' senior house officers, 1st and 2nd year registrars and 3rd and 4th year registrars; P < 0.0001. Many final year trainees (12/20, 60%) also failed to achieve their competency target. Few trainees had seen or performed any cricothyrotomies (medians 0, IQRs 0-1 and 0-0). Most (195/208, 94%) believed that fibreoptic intubation was a core skill and 199/212 (94%) believed that all should be competent by completion of training. Ten percent (n = 208) felt it unethical to perform an awake training intubation with full consent and 10% believed it acceptable without explanation. Most (82.7%) would fibreoptically intubate an asleep patient (requiring intubation) without consent. CONCLUSION: Trainees reported a gap between their perception of competence and achievement in awake fibreoptic intubation. Simple and complex simulations and structured training programmes may help. Anaesthetists must address the ethics of clinical training in advanced airway management.

Anesthesiology↗