Article Text
PDF
Abstract
Please confirm that an ethics committee approval has been applied for or granted: Not relevant (see information at the bottom of this page)
Application for ESRA Abstract Prizes: I apply as an Anesthesiologist (Aged 35 years old or less)
Background and Aims Ultrasound-guided interventional analgesia and vascular access procedures (UGNB&VA) are common in clinical practice. During UGNB&VA, the skin integrity is breached by the needle, which can lead to transducer and cable contamination with blood and pathogens. Surprisingly, no universally accepted infectious precautions exist, and the infectious precautions reportedly vary among different countries and practices. We conducted a poll of anesthesiology practitioners to gauge their opinion of whether occlusive wound dressing constitutes an adequate infectious barrier when performing UGNB&VA.
Methods The subscribers to the NYSORA community channel (n=130,000) were polled to assess their perception of whether using a wound dressing (e.g., TEGADERM®) covering the ultrasound probe, but not the cable, constitutes an adequate infectious precaution measure.
NYSORA community poll results
Results Of the 130.000 community members (82% anesthesiology professionals), 0.6% posted a vote (n= 721), figure 1. Fifty percent of respondents opined that wound dressing constitutes adequate infectious precaution measure during UGNB&VA, although the cable and exposed parts of the transducer are often contaminated with blood during UGNB&VA. The other 50% of the community felt that it was not adequate (26%), or they were not sure (24%).
Conclusions Our poll suggests that there is no consensus on infectious precaution measures during UGNB&VA. International guidelines vary on their recommendations on whether both the transducer and its cable should be sterilely covered when performing UGNB&VA. Given the rapidly increasing number of UGNB&VA procedures, we advocate for a collective effort to create universal infectious recommendations.