The occurrence of intra-operative hypotension varies between hospitals: observational analysis of more than 147,000 anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Hypotension, a common intra-operative incident, bears an important potential for morbidity. It is most often manageable and sometimes preventable, which renders its study important. Therefore, we aimed at examining hospital variations in the occurrence of intra-operative hypotension and its predictors. As secondary endpoints, we determined to what extent hypotension relates to the risk of post-operative incidents and death. METHODS: We used the Anaesthesia Databank Switzerland, built on routinely and prospectively collected data on all anaesthesias in 21 hospitals. The three outcomes were assessed using multi-level logistic regression models. RESULTS: Among 147,573 anaesthesias, hypotension ranged from 0.6% to 5.2% in participating hospitals, and from 0.3% up to 12% in different surgical specialties. Most (73.4%) were minor single events. Age, ASA status, combined general and regional anaesthesia techniques, duration of surgery and hospitalization were significantly associated with hypotension. Although significantly associated, the emergency status of the surgery had a weaker effect. Hospitals' odds ratios for hypotension varied between 0.12 and 2.50 (P < or = 0.001), even after adjusting for patient and anaesthesia factors, and for type of surgery. At least one post-operative incident occurred in 9.7% of the procedures, including 0.03% deaths. Intra-operative hypotension was associated with a higher risk of post-operative incidents and death. CONCLUSION: Wide variations remain in the occurrence of hypotension among hospitals after adjustment for risk factors. Although differential reporting from hospitals may exist, variations in anaesthesia techniques and blood pressure maintenance may also have contributed. Intra-operative hypotension is associated with morbidities and sometimes death, and constant vigilance must thus be advocated.

Indicators for the total number of melanocytic naevi : an adjunct for screening campaigns. Observational study on 292 patients.

BACKGROUND: The presence of multiple melanocytic naevi is a strong risk factor for melanoma. Use of the whole body naevus count to identify at-risk patients is impractical. OBJECTIVES: To (i) identify a valid anatomical predictor of total naevus count; (ii) determine the number of naevi that most accurately predict total naevus count above 25, 50 and 100; and (iii) evaluate determinants of multiple melanocytic naevi and atypical naevi. METHODS: Clinical data from 292 consecutive Spanish patients consulting for skin lesions requiring debriding were collected throughout 2009 and 2010. Correlations between site-specific and whole body naevus counts were analysed. Cut-offs to predict total naevus counts were determined using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. RESULTS: The studied population was young (median age 31 years, interquartile range 28-43). The naevus count on the right arm correlated best with the total nevus count (R(2) 0·80 for men, 0·86 for women). Presence of at least five naevi on the right arm was the strongest determinant of a total naevus count above 50 [odds ratio (OR) 34·4, 95% confidence interval (CI) 13·9-85·0] and of having at least one atypical naevus (OR 5·7, 95% CI 2·4-13·5). Cut-off values of 6, 8 and 11 naevi on the right arm best predicted total naevus count above 25, 50 and 100, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the arm as a practical and reliable site to estimate the total naevus count when screening or phenotyping large populations. Threshold values for the number of naevi on the arm are proposed to help identify patients for melanoma screening.

Patients' understanding of blood tests and attitudes to HIV screening in the emergency department of a Swiss teaching hospital: a cross-sectional observational study.

BACKGROUND: In Switzerland, patients may undergo "blood tests" without being informed what these are screening for. Inadequate doctor-patient communication may result in patient misunderstanding. We examined what patients in the emergency department (ED) believed they had been screened for and explored their attitudes to routine (non-targeted) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening. METHODS: Between 1st October 2012 and 28th February 2013, a questionnaire-based survey was conducted among patients aged 16-70 years old presenting to the ED of Lausanne University Hospital. Patients were asked: (1) if they believed they had been screened for HIV; (2) if they agreed in principle to routine HIV screening and (3) if they agreed to be HIV tested during their current ED visit. RESULTS: Of 466 eligible patients, 411 (88%) agreed to participate. Mean age was 46 ± 16 years; 192 patients (47%) were women; 366 (89%) were Swiss or European; 113 (27%) believed they had been screened for HIV, the proportion increasing with age (p ≤0.01), 297 (72%) agreed in principle with routine HIV testing in the ED, and 138 patients (34%) agreed to be HIV tested during their current ED visit. CONCLUSION: In this ED population, 27% believed incorrectly they had been screened for HIV. Over 70% agreed in principle with routine HIV testing and 34% agreed to be tested during their current visit. These results demonstrate willingness among patients concerning routine HIV testing in the ED and highlight a need for improved doctor-patient communication about what a blood test specifically screens for.