Can anesthesia information management systems improve quality in the surgical suite?

Jaume Balust and Alex Macario
Current Opinion in Anaesthesiology

In the article "Can anesthesia information management systems improve quality in the surgical suite?"
Dr. Balust from Barcelona Spain and Dr. Macario from Stanford USA summarize recent published studies and developments related to the use of Anesthesia Information Management Systems (AIMS) for quality assurance and quality improvement. AIMS measure, store, and allow querying of collected vital sign data, and enable the systematic analysis of anesthesia-related perioperative data.

Although AIMS were first introduced more than 20 years ago, implementation rate is low: Approximately 20% of University hospitals in USA and 10% in Europe. Historically, the challenge for hospitals buying AIMS was that the more sophisticated, commercial AIMS products were stand-alone systems, not modules integrated with the rest of the facility-wide clinical information system. The main reasons for low implementation rate are high acquisition cost, high running cost, lack of compatibility, no clear return of inversion, and the common request for customization by the end user hospital and anesthesiologist.  The authors report that AIMS is too often seen as a solution, instead of as a tool requiring active management by anesthesiologists for quality assurance programs, computerized decision support, and standardizing care so that every surgical patient receives optimal care. Anesthesia groups have recognized the importance of assigning a dedicated biomedical team and programmer to fully realize the clinical and business benefits of AIMS.

READ THIS ARTICLE