Skip to main content
PMC home page
Quality & Safety in Health Care logoLink to Quality & Safety in Health Care
. 2005 Jun;14(3):e1. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2002.004101

Crisis management during anaesthesia: the development of an anaesthetic crisis management manual

W Runciman, M Kluger, R Morris, A Paix, L Watterson, R Webb
PMCID: PMC1744021  PMID: 15933282

Abstract

Background: All anaesthetists have to handle life threatening crises with little or no warning. However, some cognitive strategies and work practices that are appropriate for speed and efficiency under normal circumstances may become maladaptive in a crisis. It was judged in a previous study that the use of a structured "core" algorithm (based on the mnemonic COVER ABCD–A SWIFT CHECK) would diagnose and correct the problem in 60% of cases and provide a functional diagnosis in virtually all of the remaining 40%. It was recommended that specific sub-algorithms be developed for managing the problems underlying the remaining 40% of crises and assembled in an easy-to-use manual. Sub-algorithms were therefore developed for these problems so that they could be checked for applicability and validity against the first 4000 anaesthesia incidents reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study (AIMS).

Methods: The need for 24 specific sub-algorithms was identified. Teams of practising anaesthetists were assembled and sets of incidents relevant to each sub-algorithm were identified from the first 4000 reported to AIMS. Based largely on successful strategies identified in these reports, a set of 24 specific sub-algorithms was developed for trial against the 4000 AIMS reports and assembled into an easy-to-use manual. A process was developed for applying each component of the core algorithm COVER at one of four levels (scan-check-alert/ready-emergency) according to the degree of perceived urgency, and incorporated into the manual. The manual was disseminated at a World Congress and feedback was obtained.

Results: Each of the 24 specific crisis management sub-algorithms was tested against the relevant incidents among the first 4000 reported to AIMS and compared with the actual management by the anaesthetist at the time. It was judged that, if the core algorithm had been correctly applied, the appropriate sub-algorithm would have been resolved better and/or faster in one in eight of all incidents, and would have been unlikely to have caused harm to any patient. The descriptions of the validation of each of the 24 sub-algorithms constitute the remaining 24 papers in this set. Feedback from five meetings each attended by 60–100 anaesthetists was then collated and is included.

Conclusion: The 24 sub-algorithms developed form the basis for developing a rational evidence-based approach to crisis management during anaesthesia. The COVER component has been found to be satisfactory in real life resuscitation situations and the sub-algorithms have been used successfully for several years. It would now be desirable for carefully designed simulator based studies, using naive trainees at the start of their training, to systematically examine the merits and demerits of various aspects of the sub-algorithms. It would seem prudent that these sub-algorithms be regarded, for the moment, as decision aids to support and back up clinicians' natural responses to a crisis when all is not progressing as expected.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (384.8 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Arah Onyebuchi A. Professional monitoring and critical incident reporting using personal digital assistants. Med J Aust. 2003 Apr 7;178(7):359–359. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2003.tb05242.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Boëlle P. Y., Garnerin P., Sicard J. F., Clergue F., Bonnet F. Voluntary reporting system in anaesthesia: is there a link between undesirable and critical events? Qual Health Care. 2000 Dec;9(4):203–209. doi: 10.1136/qhc.9.4.203. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. FLANAGAN J. C. The critical incident technique. Psychol Bull. 1954 Jul;51(4):327–358. doi: 10.1037/h0061470. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Gaba D. M. Anaesthesiology as a model for patient safety in health care. BMJ. 2000 Mar 18;320(7237):785–788. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7237.785. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Gaba D. M., DeAnda A. The response of anesthesia trainees to simulated critical incidents. Anesth Analg. 1989 Apr;68(4):444–451. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Katz R. I., Lagasse R. S. Factors influencing the reporting of adverse perioperative outcomes to a quality management program. Anesth Analg. 2000 Feb;90(2):344–350. doi: 10.1097/00000539-200002000-00020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Nolan T. W. System changes to improve patient safety. BMJ. 2000 Mar 18;320(7237):771–773. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7237.771. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Runciman W. B. Crisis management. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1988 Feb;16(1):86–88. doi: 10.1177/0310057X8801600129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Runciman W. B., Merry A. F. Crises in clinical care: an approach to management. Qual Saf Health Care. 2005 Jun;14(3):156–163. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2004.012856. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Runciman W. B., Webb R. K., Barker L., Currie M. The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. The pulse oximeter: applications and limitations--an analysis of 2000 incident reports. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1993 Oct;21(5):543–550. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9302100509. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Runciman W. B., Webb R. K., Klepper I. D., Lee R., Williamson J. A., Barker L. The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. Crisis management--validation of an algorithm by analysis of 2000 incident reports. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1993 Oct;21(5):579–592. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9302100515. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Schaefer H. G., Helmreich R. L., Scheidegger D. Human factors and safety in emergency medicine. Resuscitation. 1994 Dec;28(3):221–225. doi: 10.1016/0300-9572(94)90067-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Schneider A. J., Murray W. B., Mentzer S. C., Miranda F., Vaduva S. "Helper:" A critical events prompter for unexpected emergencies. J Clin Monit. 1995 Nov;11(6):358–364. doi: 10.1007/BF01616741. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Webb R. K., Currie M., Morgan C. A., Williamson J. A., Mackay P., Russell W. J., Runciman W. B. The Australian Incident Monitoring Study: an analysis of 2000 incident reports. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1993 Oct;21(5):520–528. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9302100507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Webb R. K., van der Walt J. H., Runciman W. B., Williamson J. A., Cockings J., Russell W. J., Helps S. The Australian Incident Monitoring Study. Which monitor? An analysis of 2000 incident reports. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1993 Oct;21(5):529–542. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9302100508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Yong H., Kluger M. T. Incident reporting in anaesthesia: a survey of practice in New Zealand. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2003 Oct;31(5):555–559. doi: 10.1177/0310057X0303100510. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Quality & safety in health care are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES