Effect of introduction of a new electronic anesthesia record (Epic) system on the safety and efficiency of patient care in a gastrointestinal endoscopy suite-comparison with historical cohort

Background: Use of electronic medical record systems has increased in the recent years. Epic is one such system gaining popularity in the USA. Epic is a private company, which invented the electronic documentation system adopted in our hospital. In spite of many presumed advantages, its use is not critically analyzed. Some of the perceived advantages are increased efficiency and protection against litigation as a result of accurate documentation. Materials and Methods: In this study, retrospective data of 305 patients who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (wherein electronic charting was used - "Epic group") were compared with 288 patients who underwent the same procedure with documentation saved on a paper chart ("paper group"). Time of various events involved in the procedure such as anesthesia start, endoscope insertion, endoscope removal, and transfer to the postanesthesia care unit were routinely documented. From this data, the various time durations were calculated. Results: Both "anesthesia start to scope insertion" times and "scope removal to transfer" times were significantly less in the Epic group compared to the paper group. Use of Epic system led to a saving of 4 min of procedure time per patient. However, the mean oxygen saturation was significantly less in the Epic group. Conclusion: In spite of perceived advantages of Epic documentation system, significant hurdles remain with its use. Although the system allows seamless flow of patients, failure to remove all artifacts can lead to errors and become a source of potential litigation hazard

Cardiac arrests in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy: A retrospective analysis of 73,029 procedures

Background/Aims: Airway difficulties leading to cardiac arrest are frequently encountered during propofol sedation in patients undergoing gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy. With a noticeable increase in the use of propofol for endoscopic sedation, we decided to examine the incidence and outcome of cardiac arrests in patients undergoing gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy with sedation. Patients and Methods: In this retrospective study, cardiac arrest data obtained from the clinical quality improvement and local registry over 5 years was analyzed. The information of patients who sustained cardiac arrest attributable to sedation was studied in detail. Analysis included comparison of cardiac arrests due to all causes until discharge (or death) versus the cardiac arrests and death occurring during the procedure and in the recovery area. Results: The incidence of cardiac arrest and death (all causes, until discharge) was 6.07 and 4.28 per 10,000 in patients sedated with propofol, compared with non–propofol-based sedation (0.67 and 0.44). The incidence of cardiac arrest during and immediately after the procedure (recovery area) for all endoscopies was 3.92 per 10,000; of which, 72% were airway management related. About 90.0% of all peri-procedural cardiac arrests occurred in patients who received propofol. Conclusions: The incidence of cardiac arrest and death is about 10 times higher in patients receiving propofol-based sedation compared with those receiving midazolam–fentanyl sedation. More than two thirds of these events occur during EGD and ERCP