Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/50568
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSomrat Charuluxanananen_US
dc.contributor.authorWanwimol Saengchoteen_US
dc.contributor.authorSireeluck Klanarongen_US
dc.contributor.authorYodying Punjasawadwongen_US
dc.contributor.authorWaraporn Chau-Inen_US
dc.contributor.authorChanrit Lawthaweesawaten_US
dc.contributor.authorThewarug Werawatganonaen_US
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-04T04:42:27Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-04T04:42:27Z-
dc.date.issued2010-06-01en_US
dc.identifier.issn19057415en_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-77957953662en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=77957953662&origin=inwarden_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/50568-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The Royal College of Anesthesiologists of Thailand (RCAT) performed large-scale epidemiologic study of anesthesia-related complications and national incidents study in 2004 and 2007, respectively. Objectives: Evaluate the anesthesia service in Thailand with regard to status of quality and patient safety. Material and methods: A pre-planned structured questionnaire regarding demographic, administrative, preanesthetic, intraoperative postanesthetic variables and complications were requested to be filled in by nurse anesthetists attending the refresher course lecture of RCAT in February 2008. Descriptive statistics was used. Results: Three hundred fifty questionnaires were given and 341 respondents (97%) returned the questionnaires. Most of the respondents (90%) worked in government section. Thirty percent of respondents practiced in hospital without medical doctor anesthesiologist and 58% of nurse anesthetists worked in hospitals that have been accredited. Forty-six percent of respondents reported unavailability of a 24-hour recovery room. The questionnaires revealed of inadequacy of anesthesia personnel (64%), inadequate supervision during emergency condition (53%), inadequacy of patient information regarding anesthesia (57-69%), and low opportunity for patient to choose choice of anesthesia (19%). The commonly used monitoring were pulse oximeter (92% of respondents) and electrocardiography (63%). One-third (32%) of respondents had to provide of anesthesia for patients with insufficient NPO (non per oral) time. Common problems that the respondents experienced were miscommunication (49%), intraoperative cardiac arrest during the past year (35%), error related to infusion pump (24%) and medication error (8%). Fifty-five percent of respondents had to monitor at least one patient per month receiving spinal anesthesia. Conclusion: Suggested strategies for quality and patient safety improvement in anesthesia service are increasing personnel, increasing 24-hour recovery room, improvement of supervision, improvement of communication, compliance to guidelines and improvement of nurse anesthetist's training regarding monitoring patient receiving spinal anesthesia and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.en_US
dc.subjectBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biologyen_US
dc.titleQuality and patient safety in anesthesia service: Thai surveyen_US
dc.typeJournalen_US
article.title.sourcetitleAsian Biomedicineen_US
article.volume4en_US
article.stream.affiliationsChulalongkorn Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsMahidol Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsBuddhachinaraj Hospitalen_US
article.stream.affiliationsChiang Mai Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsKhon Kaen Universityen_US
article.stream.affiliationsRamkhamhang Universityen_US
Appears in Collections:CMUL: Journal Articles

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in CMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.