Safety & quality resources: WebAIRS articles

Abstract
Prevention of arterial oxygen desaturation during anaesthesia with high-flow nasal oxygen (HFNO) has gained greater acceptance for a widening range of procedures. However, during HFNO use there remains the potential for development of significant anaesthesia-associated apnoea or hypoventilation and the possibility of hypercarbia, with harmful cardiovascular or neurological sequelae. The aim of this study was to determine whether any HFNO-related hypercarbia adverse incidents had been reported on webAIRS, an online database of adverse anaesthesia-related incidents. Two relevant reports were identified of complications due to marked hypercarbia during HFNO use to maintain oxygenation. In both reports, HFNO and total intravenous anaesthesia were used during endoscopic procedures through the upper airway. In both, the extent of hypoventilation went undetected during HFNO use. An ensuing cardiac arrest was reported in one report, ascribed to acute hypercarbia-induced exacerbation of the patient's pre-existing pulmonary hypertension. In the other report, hypercarbia led to a prolonged duration of decreased level of consciousness post procedure, requiring ventilatory support. During the search, an additional 11 reports of postoperative hypercarbia-associated sedation were identified, unrelated to HFNO. In these additional reports an extended duration of severe acute hypercarbia led to sedation or loss of consciousness, consistent with the known effects of hypercarbia on consciousness. These 13 reports highlight the potential dangers of unrecognised and untreated hypercarbia, even if adequate oxygenation is maintained.

Abstract
There were 684 perioperative cardiac arrests reported to webAIRS between September 2009 and March 2022. The majority involved patients older than 60 years, classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status 3 to 5, undergoing an emergency or major procedure. The most common precipitants included airway events, cardiovascular events, massive blood loss. medication issues, and sepsis. The highest mortality rate was 54% of the 46 cases in the miscellaneous category (this included 34 cases of severe sepsis, which had a mortality of 65%). This was followed by cardiovascular precipitants (n = 424) in which there were 147 deaths (35% mortality): these precipitants included blood loss (53%), embolism (61%) and myocardial infarction (70%). Airway and breathing events accounted for 25% and anaphylaxis 8%. A specialist anaesthetist attended the majority of these cardiac arrests. As webAIRS is a voluntary database, it is not possible to determine the incidence of perioperative cardiac arrest and only descriptive information on factors associated with cardiac arrest can be obtained. Nevertheless, the large number of reports includes a wide range of cases, precipitants, demographics and outcomes, providing ample opportunity to learn from these events. The data also provide rich scope for further research into further initiatives to prevent cardiac arrest in the perioperative period, and to improve outcomes, should a cardiac arrest occur.

Abstract
Regional anaesthesia is an essential tool in the armamentarium for paediatric anaesthesia. While largely safe and effective, a range of serious yet preventable adverse events can occur. Incidence and risk factors have been described, but few detailed case series exist relating to paediatric regional anaesthesia. Across Australia and New Zealand, a web-based anaesthesia incident reporting system enables voluntary reporting of detailed anaesthesia-related events in adults and children. From this database, all reports involving paediatric regional anaesthesia (age less than 17 years) were retrieved. Perioperative events and their outcomes were reviewed and analysed. When offered, the reported contributing or alleviating factors relating to the case and its management were noted. This paper provides a summary of these reports alongside an evidence review to support safe practice. Of 8000 reported incidents, 26 related to paediatric regional anaesthesia were identified. There were no deaths or reports of permanent harm. Nine reports of local anaesthetic systemic toxicity were included, seven equipment and technical issues, six errors in which regional anaesthesia made an indirect contribution and four logistical and communication issues. Most incidents involved single-shot techniques or a neuraxial approach. Common themes included variable local anaesthetic dosing, cognitive overload, inadequate preparation and communication breakdown. Neonates, infants and medically complex children were disproportionately represented, highlighting their inherent risk profile. A range of preventable incidents are reported relating to patient, systems and human factors, demonstrating several areas for improvement. Risk stratification, application of existing dosing and administration guidelines, and effective teamwork and communication are encouraged to ensure safe regional anaesthesia in the paediatric population.

Abstract
Anaesthesia for caesarean section occurs commonly and places specific demands on anaesthetists. We analysed 469 narratives concerning anaesthesia for caesarean section, entered by Australian and New Zealand anaesthetists into the webAIRS incident reporting system between 2009 and 2022. As expected, compared with the remaining 8978 database entries, the 469 incidents were more likely to be emergency cases (relative risk (RR) 1.95), more likely to occur between 18:00 and 22:00 hours (RR 1.81) and between 22:00 and 07:59 hours (RR 4.40) and more likely to be undertaken using neuraxial anaesthesia (RR 9.18). Most incidents involved more than one event. The most commonly reported incidents included intraoperative neuraxial anaesthesia complications (180, 38%), medication errors or issues (136, 29%), equipment issues (49, 10%), obstetric haemorrhage (38, 8%), maternal cardiac arrests (28, 6%), endotracheal tube issues (28, 6%) and neonatal resuscitation (24, 5%). Inadequate neuraxial block, reported in 95 incidents, was the most common intraoperative neuraxial complication. Allergic reactions, reported in 30 incidents, were the most common medication issue, followed by 17 associated with oxytocin and 16 syringe swaps. Thirty-eight reports included significant maternal haemorrhage, with eight of those incidents including maternal cardiac arrest. There was one maternal death and eight incidents with neonatal deaths reported, affecting nine neonates. Problems with intraoperative neuraxial anaesthesia were the most commonly reported events. Implementation of specific strategies are encouraged to enhance preparation for conversion to general anaesthesia and to mitigate medication errors, particularly those relating to oxytocic use and neuraxial anaesthesia medications.

Abstract
Corneal abrasions are an uncommon complication of anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to identify potential risk factors, treatment and outcomes associated with corneal abrasions reported to the web-based anaesthesia incident reporting system (webAIRS), a voluntary de-identified anaesthesia incident reporting system in Australia and New Zealand, from 2009 to 2021. There were 43 such cases of corneal abrasions reported to webAIRS over this period. The most common postoperative finding was a painful eye. Common features included older patients, individuals with pre-existing eye conditions, general anaesthesia and procedures longer than 60 minutes. Most cases were treated with a combination of lubricating eye drops or aqueous antibiotic eye drops. The findings indicate that patients who sustain a perioperative corneal abrasion can be reassured that in many cases it will heal within 48 hours, but they should seek earlier review if symptoms persist or deteriorate. None of the cases in this series resulted in permanent harm. Well established eye protective measures are important to utilise throughout the perioperative period, including the time until the patient has recovered in the post-anaesthesia care unit.

Abstract
Medication error is a well-recognised cause of harm to patients undergoing anaesthesia. From the first 4000 reports in the webAIRS anaesthetic incident reporting system, we identified 462 reports of medication errors. These reports were reviewed iteratively by several reviewers paying particular attention to their narratives. The commonest error category was incorrect dose (29.4%), followed by substitution (28.1%), incorrect route (7.6%), omission (6.5%), inappropriate choice (5.8%), repetition (5.4%), insertion (4.1%), wrong timing (3.5%), wrong patient (1.5%), wrong side (1.5%) and others (6.5%). Most (58.9%) of the errors resulted in at least some harm (20.8% mild, 31.0% moderate and 7.1% severe). Contributing factors to the medication errors included the presence of look-alike medications, storage of medications in the incorrect compartment, inadequate labelling of medications, pressure of time, anaesthetist fatigue, unfamiliarity with the medication, distraction, involvement of multiple people and poor communication. These data add to current evidence suggesting a persistent and concerning failure effectively to address medication safety in anaesthesia. The wide variation in the nature of the errors and contributing factors underline the need for increased systematic and multifaceted efforts underpinned by a strengthening of the current focus on safety culture to improve medication safety in anaesthesia. This will require the concerted and committed engagement of all concerned, from practitioners at the clinical workface, to those who fund and manage healthcare.

Abstract
Background: Online consultations (OCs) allow patients to contact their care providers on the web. Worldwide, OCs have been rolled out in primary care rapidly owing to policy initiatives and COVID-19. There is a lack of evidence regarding how OC design and implementation influence care quality.

Objective: We aimed to synthesize research on the impacts of OCs on primary care quality, and how these are influenced by system design and implementation.

Methods: We searched databases from January 2010 to February 2022. We included quantitative and qualitative studies of real-world OC use in primary care. Quantitative data were transformed into qualitative themes. We used thematic synthesis informed by the Institute of Medicine domains of health care quality, and framework analysis informed by the nonadoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, and sustainability framework. Strength of evidence was judged using the GRADE-CERQual approach.

Results: We synthesized 63 studies from 9 countries covering 31 OC systems, 14 (22%) of which used artificial intelligence; 41% (26/63) of studies were published from 2020 onward, and 17% (11/63) were published after the COVID-19 pandemic. There was no quantitative evidence for negative impacts of OCs on patient safety, and qualitative studies suggested varied perceptions of their safety. Some participants believed OCs improved safety, particularly when patients could describe their queries using free text. Staff workload decreased when sufficient resources were allocated to implement OCs and patients used them for simple problems or could describe their queries using free text. Staff workload increased when OCs were not integrated with other software or organizational workflows and patients used them for complex queries. OC systems that required patients to describe their queries using multiple-choice questionnaires increased workload for patients and staff. Health costs decreased when patients used OCs for simple queries and increased when patients used them for complex queries. Patients using OCs were more likely to be female, younger, and native speakers, with higher socioeconomic status. OCs increased primary care access for patients with mental health conditions, verbal communication difficulties, and barriers to attending in-person appointments. Access also increased by providing a timely response to patients' queries. Patient satisfaction increased when using OCs owing to better primary care access, although it decreased when using multiple-choice questionnaire formats.

Conclusions: This is the first theoretically informed synthesis of research on OCs in primary care and includes studies conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic. It contributes new knowledge that, in addition to having positive impacts on care quality such as increased access, OCs also have negative impacts such as increased workload. Negative impacts can be mitigated through appropriate OC system design (eg, free text format), incorporation of advanced technologies (eg, artificial intelligence), and integration into technical infrastructure (eg, software) and organizational workflows (eg, timely responses).

Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42020191802; https://tinyurl.com/2p84ezjy.

Abstract
Purpose of review: This article proposes a standardized framework for colour-coding states of criticality in clinical situations and their respective escalated responses.

Recent findings: The first level is a green zone representing a 'safe' space (to proceed), where any hazards are controlled, latent or undetectable. The second is an amber zone, where hazards are known to be present, but one can proceed with caution and increased vigilance, and where defences are used to prevent escalation to a crisis. In the red phase -- a state of crisis -- a hazard is realized, clear and present. This is a time to decide what actions are required to mitigate the threat. Next, a blue phase refers to a life-threatening emergency, where the system is unstable, harm is evident and compounding upon itself, and immediate rescue action is needed to avert an irreversible outcome. Finally, dark grey represents the aftermath, where the situation has either stabilized or progressed to its final outcome, a time to reflect and learn.

Summary: A standardized colour-coding system for assessing and responding to escalating levels of criticality has implications for clinical practice and adverse event reporting systems.

bstract
Published reports of uvular necrosis are uncommon and it is possibly an under-reported complication of oropharyngeal manipulation. Uvular necrosis is thought to develop due to ischaemia secondary to mechanical compression of the uvula from oropharyngeal devices. Patients typically present with symptoms of a sore throat within 48 hours postoperatively. It is unclear whether there are any preventable factors, or any specific management strategies that might reduce this complication. Treatment is most commonly conservative management, including observation and simple analgesia. We present 13 cases of uvular injury that were reported to a web-based anaesthesia incident reporting system (webAIRS), a voluntary de-identified anaesthesia incident reporting system in Australia and New Zealand. While the postoperative findings varied, sore throat was the most frequent symptom. Most of the cases resolved spontaneously; the remainder with supportive treatment only. The findings suggest that patients who sustain a uvular injury can be reassured, but they should be advised to seek review early if sore throat persists or any difficulty with breathing develops.

Abstract
A review of the first 4000 reports to the webAIRS anaesthesia incident reporting database was performed to analyse cases reported as difficult or failed intubation. Patient, task, caregiver and system factors were evaluated. Among the 4000 reports, there were 170 incidents of difficult or failed intubation. Difficult or failed intubation incidents were most common in the 40-59 years age group. More than half of cases were not predicted. A total of 40% involved patients with a body mass index >30 kg/m2 and 41% involved emergency cases. A third of the reports described multiple intubation attempts. Of the reports, 18% mentioned equipment problems including endotracheal tube cuff rupture, laryngoscope light failure, dysfunctional capnography and delays with availability of additional equipment to assist with intubation. Immediate outcomes included 40 cases of oxygen desaturation below 85%; of these cases, four required cardiopulmonary resuscitation. The majority of the incidents resulted in no harm or minor harm (45%). However, 12% suffered moderate harm, 3.5% severe harm and there were three deaths (although only one related to the airway incident). Despite advances and significant developments in airway management strategies, difficult and failed intubation still occurs. Although not all incidents are predictable, nor are all preventable, the information provided by this analysis might assist with future planning, preparation and management of difficult intubation.

Abstract
Purpose of review: The purpose is to show the advantages of a Bowtie diagram as a versatile tool for displaying and understanding the evolvement and management of critical incidents.

Recent findings: The Bowtie diagram has been used recently in anesthesia to depict critical incidents having been used in high-risk industries for several decades. This diagram displays the progression from latent factors to potential harm in five steps.

Summary: The Bowtie diagram combines the features of a fault tree and an event tree with the adverse event, known as the Top Event separating the two sections. The fault tree is similar in concept to a Swiss Cheese diagram and the event tree similar in concept to an emergency management algorithm. Preventive barriers and escalation measures are used to detect and trap abnormal states. If these fail, the event proceeds to a crisis, leading to the Top Event, a time for making decisions. A recovery state follows, which depicts an emergency state mandating immediate life or limb-saving management to recover from the crisis. Finally, in the aftermath state, a time for reflection and learning, ultimate outcomes are shown in the right-hand column.

Video abstract: The Bowtie Diagram. Designed and created by Yasmin Endlich, Martin D. Culwick and Stavros N. Prineas, http://links.lww.com/COAN/A68.

Abstract
This audit of airway incidents was conducted over six months in 12 tertiary level hospitals across Australia and New Zealand. During that time, 131,233 patients had airway management and 111 reports were submitted (incidence 0.08%). The airway incidents included a combination of difficult airway management (83), oxygen desaturation (58), aspiration (19), regurgitation (14), laryngospasm (16), airway bleeding (10), bronchospasm (5) and dental injury (4), which gave a total of 209 events in 111 reports. Most incidents occurred during general anaesthesia (GA; 83.8%) and normal working hours (81.1%). Forty-three percent were associated with head and neck surgery and 12.6% with upper abdominal procedures. Of these patients, 52% required further medical treatment or additional procedures and 16.2% required unplanned admission to an intensive care unit or a high dependency unit. A total of 31.5% of patients suffered from temporary harm and 1.8% from permanent harm. There was one death. The factors associated with a high relative risk (RR) of an airway incident included American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA PS) (ASA PS 2 versus 1, RR 1.75; ASA PS 3 versus 1, RR 3.56; ASA PS 4 versus 1, RR 6.1), and emergency surgery (RR 2.16 compared with elective). Sedation and monitored anaesthesia care were associated with lower RRs (RR 0.49 and RR 0.73 versus GA, respectively). Inadequate airway assessment, poor judgement and poor planning appeared to be contributors to these events. Future teaching and research should focus on these areas to further improve airway management and patient safety.

Review of unusual patient care experiences is a cornerstone of medical education. Each month, the AQI-AIRS Steering Committee abstracts a patient history submitted to the Anesthesia Incident Reporting System (AIRS) and authors a discussion of the safety and human factors challenges involved. Real-life case histories often include multiple clinical decisions, only some of which can be discussed in the space available. Absence of commentary should not be construed as agreement with the clinical decisions described. Feedback regarding this article can be sent by email to airs@asahq.org. Report incidents or download the AIRS mobile app at www.aqiairs.org.

Unexpected difficult airways are always challenging. This article captures the information regarding difficult airway in an easy to understand Bowtie Diagram

No abstract available

WebAIRS has received a number of cases where oxygen pooled under the drapes during head and neck procedures has lead to a fire. Two of these involved high flow nasal oxygen (HFNO). This article describes the two cases invloving HFNO. In summary, it is advisable that anaesthetists use the lowest FiO2 possible to support the patient’s oxygen saturation at a safe level. Close communication between surgeons, anaesthetists and nursing staff throughout these procedures is recommended. Oxygen pooling under the drapes should be avoided by providing good airflow around the sterile area. The possible use of suction to scavenge high oxygen pockets trapped under drapes and in contact with the patient should also be considered.

Abstract
This cross-sectional overview of the second 4000 incidents reported to webAIRS has findings that are very similar to the previous overview of the first 4000 incidents. The distribution of patient age, body mass index and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status was similar, as was anaesthetist gender, grade, location and time of day of incidents. About 35% of incidents occurred during non-elective procedures (vs. 33% in the first 4000 incidents). The proportion of incidents in the various main categories was also similar, with respiratory/airway being most common, followed by cardiovascular, medication-related and medical device or equipment-related incidents. Together these categories made up about 78% of all incidents in both overviews. The immediate outcome was comparable with reports of harm in about a quarter of incidents and a similar rate of deaths (4.7% vs. 4.2%). However, the proportion of patients who had received total intravenous anaesthesia was higher (17.6% vs. 7.7%) and the proportion of patients who received combined intravenous and inhalational anaesthesia was lower (52.3% vs. 58.4%), as was the proportion receiving local anaesthesia alone (1.6% vs. 6.7%). There was a small increase in the number of incidents resulting in unplanned admission to a high dependency or intensive care unit (18.1% vs. 13.5%). It is not clear whether these differences represent trends or random observations. About 48% of incidents were considered preventable by the reporters (vs. 52% in the first 4000). These findings support continued emphasis on human and system factors to promote and improve patient safety in anaesthesia care.

Abstract : ‘Can’t intubate, can’t oxygenate’ (CICO) scenario is a rare anesthesia crisis for which the management has been suboptimal in the past. Inadequacy and disorganization of airway equipment have been identified as one of the latent factors that contribute to the failure of CICO management. We initiated a quality improvement project to review the equipment aspect of CICO management in our department. We revised our emergency front of neck access (FONA) airway equipment based on available evidence and organized the equipment with custom-made CICO kits. The CICO kits could potentially streamline management, and institutionally standardized equipment across all critical care departments. Our approach may serve as a practical guide for implementation of standard practice for CICO management.

Abstract
In preparation for a case, an anaesthetist opened a 20 ml glass vial of propofol and aspirated the propofol into a syringe via a blunt drawing-up needle. Increased resistance was felt with aspiration. On inspection, a shard of glass was found at the tip of the drawing-up needle. The shard was presumed to be from the propofol ampoule, and to have fallen into the solution upon snapping open its glass tip. This illustrative case raises the issue of contamination of drugs by particles introduced during the drawing-up process. It also highlights the possibility that during the drawing-up process, intravenous drugs may become contaminated not just with particles, but with microorganisms on the surface of the particles. In this article, we discuss relevant recent research of the implications of this type of drug contamination. We draw attention to the need for meticulous care in drawing up and administering intravenous drugs during anaesthesia, particularly propofol.

Abstract
The aim of this study was to analyse the incidents related to awareness during general anaesthesia in the first 4,000 cases reported to webAIRS-an anaesthetic incident reporting system established in Australia and New Zealand in 2009. Included incidents were those in which the reporter selected "neurological" as the main category and "awareness/dreaming/nightmares" as a subcategory, those where the narrative report included the word "awareness" and those identified by the authors as possibly relevant to awareness. Sixty-one awareness-related incidents were analysed: 16 were classified as "awareness", 31 were classified as "no awareness but increased risk of awareness" and 14 were classified as "no awareness and no increased risk of awareness". Among 47 incidents in the former two categories, 42 (89%) were associated with low anaesthetic delivery and 24 (51%) were associated with signs of intraoperative wakefulness. Memory of intraoperative events caused significant ongoing distress for five of the 16 awareness patients. Patients continue to be put at risk of awareness by a range of well-described errors (such as syringe swaps) but also by some new errors related to recently introduced anaesthetic equipment, such as electronic anaesthesia workstations.

Too many patients are harmed by healthcare intended to help them. Anaesthesia, an essential component of healthcare, is thought to have become very safe in recent years—at least in high income countries. Indeed, anaesthetists are often held up as leaders in the pursuit of patient safety. It is easy to forget that this was not always the case: a seminal paper by Macintosh, drawing attention to basic failures in anaesthetic practice that were then contributing to avoidable deaths, is worth reading. Macintosh’s paper is surprisingly forthright and honest, and was an early example of the importance of learning from mistakes in healthcare. We have certainly made progress since then, but there is no room for complacency. The NAP43 and NAP54 publications are timely reminders that serious complications do still occur in anaesthesia today, and that they often involve relatively healthy individuals undergoing apparently straightforward surgical procedures under the care of well-trained anaesthetists. We (as anaesthetists) may be generic leaders in patient safety, but there is still much for us to learn about safety in our own speciality. The need to continue learning and improving is the primary reason for reporting and reviewing incidents.

The article in the Medial Observer is based upon the recent article published in Anaesthesia and Intensive Care relating to risk and harm reported in the first 4000 incidents analysed by ANZTADC. It was evident that the Medical Observer article had sensationalised the findings. DR Neville Gibbs (ANZTADC Chair) responded to assure the readers that anaesthesia is safe when the number of anaesthetics per year is taken into account, and that the aim of the study is to improve patient safety during anaesthesia. The following points were made in the response.

The aim of anaesthetists is to avoid all incidents. That is why studies of this type are undertaken.
Patients should be reassured that there are well over 2.5 million anaesthetics each year in Australia and New Zealand, or over 50,000 each week, so the chance of a patient having any incident at all is extremely small.
The majority of incidents result in no harm.
Further analysis of the 4000 incidents in the webAIRS database will investigate the relationship between harm and preventability, and ways to further improve patient safety.
This type of activity is an example of many many safety measures and initiatives that support an extremely high level of anaesthetic safety in Australia and New Zealand.

Abstract
This report describes an analysis of patient and procedural factors associated with a higher proportion of harm or death versus no harm in the first 4,000 incidents reported to webAIRS. The report is supplementary to a previous cross-sectional report on the first 4,000 incidents reported to webAIRS. The aim of this analysis was to identify potential patient or procedural factors that are more common in incidents resulting in harm or death than in incidents with more benign outcomes. There was a >50% higher proportion of harm (versus no harm) for incidents in which the patient's body mass index (BMI) was <18.5 kg/m2, for incidents in post-anaesthesia care units and non-theatre procedural areas, and for incidents under the main category of cardiovascular or neurological. The proportion of incidents associated with death was also higher (risk ratio >1.5) for BMI <18.5 kg/m2, incidents in non-theatre procedural areas, and incidents under the main category of cardiovascular or neurological. In addition, the proportion of incidents associated with death was higher for incidents in which the patient's age was >80 years, the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status was 4 or 5, incidents involving non-elective procedures, and incidents occurring after hours (1800 to 0800 hours). When faced with incidents with these potential risk factors, anaesthetists should consider earlier interventions and request assistance at an earlier stage. Educational strategies on incident prevention and management should place even further emphasis on scenarios involving these factors.

Abstract
webAIRS is a web-based de-identified anaesthesia incident reporting system, which was introduced in Australia and New Zealand in September 2009. By July 2016, 4,000 incident reports had been received. The incidents covered a wide range of patient age (<28 days to >90 years), American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, and body mass index (<18.5 to >50 kg/m2). They occurred across a wide range of anaesthesia techniques and grade of anaesthesia provider, and over a wide range of anaesthetising locations and times of day. In a high proportion the outcome was not benign; about 26% of incidents were associated with patient harm and a further 4% with death. Incidents appeared to be an ever-present risk in anaesthetic practice, with extrapolated estimates exceeding 200 per week across Australia and New Zealand. Independent of outcomes, many anaesthesia incidents were associated with increased use of health resources. The four most common main categories of incident were Respiratory/Airway, Medication, Cardiovascular, and Medical Device/Equipment. Over 50% of incidents were considered preventable. The narratives accompanying each incident provide a rich source of information, which will be analysed in subsequent reports on particular incident types. The summary data in this initial overview are a sober reminder of the prevalence and unpredictability of anaesthesia incidents, and their potential morbidity and mortality. The data justify current efforts to better prevent and manage anaesthesia incidents in Australia and New Zealand, and identify areas in which increased resources or additional initiatives may be required.

Abstract
The role of preoperative fasting is well established in current anaesthetic practice with different guidelines for clear fluids and food. However, chewing gum may not be categorised as either food or drink by some patients, and may not always be specified in instructions given to patients about preoperative fasting. The aim of this paper was to review anaesthesia incidents involving gum chewing reported to webAIRS to obtain information on the risks, if any, of gum chewing during the preoperative fasting period. There were nine incidents involving chewing gum reported between late 2009 and early 2015. There were no adverse outcomes from the nine incidents other than postponement of surgery in three cases and cancellation in one. In particular, there were no reports of aspiration or airway obstruction. Nevertheless, there were five cases in which the gum was not detected preoperatively and was found in the patient's mouth either intraoperatively or postoperatively. These cases of undetected gum occurred despite patient and staff compliance with their current preoperative checklists. While the risk of increased gastric secretions related to chewing gum preoperatively are not known, the potential for airway obstruction if the gum is not detected and removed preoperatively is very real. We recommend that patients should be specifically advised to avoid gum chewing once fasting from clear fluids is commenced, and that a specific question regarding the presence of chewing gum should be added to all preoperative checklists.

Abstract
Adverse events are an unfortunate reality of caring for patients in our current healthcare system. Preventing and mitigating these events are an important part of quality improvement. First, an understanding of what events occur and how often they are occurring is critical to planning improvements. Incident reporting systems are one way of gathering this information. Then, events should be categorized and analyzed for improvement. The failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) and bow-tie diagram are two tools for this purpose. Once an event has occurred, consideration should be given to the caregivers as well as the patient when managing and resolving adverse events. Prevention requires strong analysis of events and recognition of both latent (system) and human causes. Interventions have different degrees of effectiveness, ranging from highly effective forcing functions, to marginally effective encouraging statements. There are four steps to event management: mitigation, immediate management, refractory management, and follow-up.

Abstract
Bow-tie analysis is a risk analysis and management tool that has been readily adopted into routine practice in many high reliability industries such as engineering, aviation and emergency services. However, it has received little exposure so far in healthcare. Nevertheless, its simplicity, versatility, and pictorial display may have benefits for the analysis of a range of healthcare risks, including complex and multiple risks and their interactions. Bow-tie diagrams are a combination of a fault tree and an event tree, which when combined take the shape of a bow tie. Central to bow-tie methodology is the concept of an undesired or 'Top Event', which occurs if a hazard progresses past all prevention controls. Top Events may also occasionally occur idiosyncratically. Irrespective of the cause of a Top Event, mitigation and recovery controls may influence the outcome. Hence the relationship of hazard to outcome can be viewed in one diagram along with possible causal sequences or accident trajectories. Potential uses for bow-tie diagrams in anaesthesia risk management include improved understanding of anaesthesia hazards and risks, pre-emptive identification of absent or inadequate hazard controls, investigation of clinical incidents, teaching anaesthesia risk management, and demonstrating risk management strategies to third parties when required.

Brief History We cannot fix what we do not know. From the very first anesthetic, there have been reported cases of harm.1 Early on, these reports were often anecdotal, passed by word-ofmouth or letter among a small group of colleagues. Over time, anesthesiologists began to focus on the most devastating “incidents” associated with anesthesia and unexplained deaths. One of the first large studies on anesthesia mortality reviewed 599,548 patients who had received anesthesia2 and noted an overall mortality related partly or wholly to anesthesia of 1 in 3000 cases. The authors noted that there was an increase in anesthesia death rate when muscle relaxants were used, but accepted that there was no evidence that this was directly related to the drugs. The mechanism of these deaths was frequently cardiovascular collapse and the authors implied that this might have been because of the ganglion-blocking effect of these drugs. The relaxants used at that time included tubocurarine, decamethonium, succinylcholine, gallamine, and di-methyl tubocurarine. Anesthesiology departments throughout the world were encouraged to hold local mortality review meetings that subsequently included reviews of morbidity as well.This paper reviews the ethical considerations, the barriers to reporting and several successful local and international incident reporting systems.

SummaryThe safe administration of drugs to patients lies at the core of anaesthetic practice. Anaesthesia is unique as a medical specialty where a single doctor routinely prescribes, dispenses, prepares then administers multiple medications,1-5 often within an urgent or emergent time scale. Compound this with the fact that many of the medications used are potentially life threatening if given erroneously, it becomes clear that medication safety is fundamental to modern anaesthesia.

This paper presents a case study chronicling the development of WebAIRS, an Australasian national anaesthetic incident reporting database for health care practitioners. WebAIRS is an example of the multidisciplinary nature of the IS discipline, incorporating IS theories, tools and principles in the creation of an IT artefact with significant real world application. This case study introduces the background of the project and the motivations for its conception including the need for critical incident reporting in anaesthesia, the process of its development using IT students and the problems identified following its national release among the anaesthetic community. The paper demonstrates the evolution of contemporary IS research and the IT artefact, and how each can be crucial foundations for hospitals of the future.