Abstract
Background
We analysed the clinical practice of anaesthesia associates in the UK, as reported to the 7th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists, and compared these with medically qualified anaesthetists.
Methods
We included data from our baseline survey, activity survey and case registry as with other reports from the project.
Results
Among 197 departments of anaesthesia, 52 (26%) employed anaesthesia associates. Of 10,009 responding anaesthesia care providers, 71 (< 1%) were anaesthesia associates, of whom 33 (47%) reporting working nights or weekends (compared with 97% of medically qualified anaesthetists in training and > 90% of consultants). Anaesthesia associates reported less training and confidence in managing peri-operative cardiac arrest and its aftermath compared with medically qualified anaesthetists. Anaesthesia associates were less directly involved in the management and the aftermath of peri-operative cardiac arrest than medically qualified anaesthetists, and the psychological impacts on professional and personal life appeared to be less. Among 24,172 cases, anaesthesia associates attended 432 (2%) and were the senior anaesthesia care provider in 63 (< 1%), with indirect supervision in 27 (43%). Anaesthesia associates worked predominantly in a small number of surgical specialties during weekdays and working daytime hours. Complication rates were low in cases managed by anaesthesia associates, likely reflecting case mix. However, activity and registry case mix data show anaesthesia associates do manage high-risk cases (patients who are older, comorbid, obese and frail) with the potential for serious complications. Registry cases included higher risk cases with respect to the clinical setting and patient factors.
Conclusion
Anaesthesia associates work in enhanced roles, relative to the scope of practice at qualification agreed by organisations. Recent changes mean the Royal College of Anaesthetists and Association of Anaesthetists do not currently support an enhanced scope of practice.
We analysed the clinical practice of anaesthesia associates in the UK, as reported to the 7th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists, and compared these with medically qualified anaesthetists.
Methods
We included data from our baseline survey, activity survey and case registry as with other reports from the project.
Results
Among 197 departments of anaesthesia, 52 (26%) employed anaesthesia associates. Of 10,009 responding anaesthesia care providers, 71 (< 1%) were anaesthesia associates, of whom 33 (47%) reporting working nights or weekends (compared with 97% of medically qualified anaesthetists in training and > 90% of consultants). Anaesthesia associates reported less training and confidence in managing peri-operative cardiac arrest and its aftermath compared with medically qualified anaesthetists. Anaesthesia associates were less directly involved in the management and the aftermath of peri-operative cardiac arrest than medically qualified anaesthetists, and the psychological impacts on professional and personal life appeared to be less. Among 24,172 cases, anaesthesia associates attended 432 (2%) and were the senior anaesthesia care provider in 63 (< 1%), with indirect supervision in 27 (43%). Anaesthesia associates worked predominantly in a small number of surgical specialties during weekdays and working daytime hours. Complication rates were low in cases managed by anaesthesia associates, likely reflecting case mix. However, activity and registry case mix data show anaesthesia associates do manage high-risk cases (patients who are older, comorbid, obese and frail) with the potential for serious complications. Registry cases included higher risk cases with respect to the clinical setting and patient factors.
Conclusion
Anaesthesia associates work in enhanced roles, relative to the scope of practice at qualification agreed by organisations. Recent changes mean the Royal College of Anaesthetists and Association of Anaesthetists do not currently support an enhanced scope of practice.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 1030-1041 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Anaesthesia |
| Volume | 79 |
| Issue number | 10 |
| Early online date | 11 Jul 2024 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Oct 2024 |