Cargando…

Audit of Anesthetic Equipment in Veterinary Clinics in Spain and Portugal

The objective of this retrospective study was to review the results of a 4-year audit performed on anesthetic machines and vaporizers used in veterinary clinics in Spain and Portugal. Data was collected between July 2016 and April 2020. Inspections were carried out by a team of seven veterinarians,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Redondo, Jose I., Domenech, Luis, Mateu, Cristina, Bañeres, Alfon, Martínez, Amalia, Lopes, Diana
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7779558/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33409295
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.592597
_version_ 1783631356796862464
author Redondo, Jose I.
Domenech, Luis
Mateu, Cristina
Bañeres, Alfon
Martínez, Amalia
Lopes, Diana
author_facet Redondo, Jose I.
Domenech, Luis
Mateu, Cristina
Bañeres, Alfon
Martínez, Amalia
Lopes, Diana
author_sort Redondo, Jose I.
collection PubMed
description The objective of this retrospective study was to review the results of a 4-year audit performed on anesthetic machines and vaporizers used in veterinary clinics in Spain and Portugal. Data was collected between July 2016 and April 2020. Inspections were carried out by a team of seven veterinarians, using a human-modified system of checks that was adapted to a veterinary practice. The evaluation of each item was noted as “correct” or “incorrect”. The vaporizers' performance was evaluated using a self-calibrating gas analyzer. The vaporizer was classified as “correct” or “incorrect” when the vaporization error was less than or equal to, or more than 20%, respectively. The anesthetic machine was classified as “conforming” if all its components were noted as “correct” and no leaks were detected, or as “non-conforming” if any of the components was noted as “incorrect” or if a leak was detected. If the inspector was able to repair on-site the item malfunctions detected and the machine was fit for use, they issued a final report as “conforming.” On the contrary, if such malfunctions persisted, the final report was “non-conforming,” and a recommendation to remove the machine from service until its final repair was provided. To perform statistical analysis, each inspected item was used as predictor, classification and regression trees were built, and a random forest analysis was performed. A total of 2,001 anesthetic machines and 2,309 vaporizers were studied. After inspection, 42.7 and 26.4% of the machines were non-conforming and conforming, respectively, whereas 30.9% could be repaired in situ. A total of 27.1% of the isoflurane vaporizers and 35.9% of the sevoflurane vaporizers were incorrect. Machine learning techniques showed that the most important variables in the classification of the anesthetic machines as conforming or non-conforming were mostly the scavenger system and the canister, followed some way behind by the APL valve, source of oxygen, reservoir bag, vaporizer, and connections.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7779558
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-77795582021-01-05 Audit of Anesthetic Equipment in Veterinary Clinics in Spain and Portugal Redondo, Jose I. Domenech, Luis Mateu, Cristina Bañeres, Alfon Martínez, Amalia Lopes, Diana Front Vet Sci Veterinary Science The objective of this retrospective study was to review the results of a 4-year audit performed on anesthetic machines and vaporizers used in veterinary clinics in Spain and Portugal. Data was collected between July 2016 and April 2020. Inspections were carried out by a team of seven veterinarians, using a human-modified system of checks that was adapted to a veterinary practice. The evaluation of each item was noted as “correct” or “incorrect”. The vaporizers' performance was evaluated using a self-calibrating gas analyzer. The vaporizer was classified as “correct” or “incorrect” when the vaporization error was less than or equal to, or more than 20%, respectively. The anesthetic machine was classified as “conforming” if all its components were noted as “correct” and no leaks were detected, or as “non-conforming” if any of the components was noted as “incorrect” or if a leak was detected. If the inspector was able to repair on-site the item malfunctions detected and the machine was fit for use, they issued a final report as “conforming.” On the contrary, if such malfunctions persisted, the final report was “non-conforming,” and a recommendation to remove the machine from service until its final repair was provided. To perform statistical analysis, each inspected item was used as predictor, classification and regression trees were built, and a random forest analysis was performed. A total of 2,001 anesthetic machines and 2,309 vaporizers were studied. After inspection, 42.7 and 26.4% of the machines were non-conforming and conforming, respectively, whereas 30.9% could be repaired in situ. A total of 27.1% of the isoflurane vaporizers and 35.9% of the sevoflurane vaporizers were incorrect. Machine learning techniques showed that the most important variables in the classification of the anesthetic machines as conforming or non-conforming were mostly the scavenger system and the canister, followed some way behind by the APL valve, source of oxygen, reservoir bag, vaporizer, and connections. Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-12-21 /pmc/articles/PMC7779558/ /pubmed/33409295 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.592597 Text en Copyright © 2020 Redondo, Domenech, Mateu, Bañeres, Martínez and Lopes. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Veterinary Science
Redondo, Jose I.
Domenech, Luis
Mateu, Cristina
Bañeres, Alfon
Martínez, Amalia
Lopes, Diana
Audit of Anesthetic Equipment in Veterinary Clinics in Spain and Portugal
title Audit of Anesthetic Equipment in Veterinary Clinics in Spain and Portugal
title_full Audit of Anesthetic Equipment in Veterinary Clinics in Spain and Portugal
title_fullStr Audit of Anesthetic Equipment in Veterinary Clinics in Spain and Portugal
title_full_unstemmed Audit of Anesthetic Equipment in Veterinary Clinics in Spain and Portugal
title_short Audit of Anesthetic Equipment in Veterinary Clinics in Spain and Portugal
title_sort audit of anesthetic equipment in veterinary clinics in spain and portugal
topic Veterinary Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7779558/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33409295
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2020.592597
work_keys_str_mv AT redondojosei auditofanestheticequipmentinveterinaryclinicsinspainandportugal
AT domenechluis auditofanestheticequipmentinveterinaryclinicsinspainandportugal
AT mateucristina auditofanestheticequipmentinveterinaryclinicsinspainandportugal
AT baneresalfon auditofanestheticequipmentinveterinaryclinicsinspainandportugal
AT martinezamalia auditofanestheticequipmentinveterinaryclinicsinspainandportugal
AT lopesdiana auditofanestheticequipmentinveterinaryclinicsinspainandportugal