Summary Climate change is a real and accelerating existential danger. Urgent action is required to halt its progression, and everyone can contribute. Pollution mitigation represents an important opportunity for much needed leadership from the health community, addressing a threat that will directly and seriously impact the health and well‐being of current and future generations. Inhalational anaesthetics are a significant contributor to healthcare‐related greenhouse gas emissions and minimising their climate impact represents a meaningful and achievable intervention. A challenge exists in translating well‐established knowledge about inhalational anaesthetic pollution into practical action. CODA is a medical education and health promotion charity that aims to deliver climate action‐oriented recommendations, supported by useful resources and success stories. The CODA‐hosted platform is designed to maximise engagement of the global healthcare community and draws upon diverse experiences to develop global solutions and accelerate action. The action guidance for addressing pollution from inhalational anaesthetics is the subject of this article. These are practical, evidence‐based actions that can be undertaken to reduce the impact of pollution from inhalational anaesthetics, without compromising patient care and include: removal of desflurane from drug formularies; decommissioning central nitrous oxide piping; avoidance of nitrous oxide use; minimising fresh gas flows during anaesthesia; and prioritising total intravenous anaesthesia and regional anaesthesia when clinically safe to do so. Guidance on how to educate, implement, measure and review progress on these mitigation actions is provided, along with means to share successes and contribute to the essential, global transition towards environmentally sustainable anaesthesia.
ObjectivesThe use of directed observers in high‐fidelity simulation education is increasingly common. While evidence suggests similar educational outcomes for directed observers compared to active participants in technical skills, it remains uncertain if this benefit also exists for senior clinicians, especially in mental workload. We sought to compare the workload between active participants and directed observers using an objective measure.MethodsWe performed a prospective, repeated‐measures observational study during the New South Wales Ambulance Aeromedical Operations induction training from 2019 to 2020. Participants included senior critical care doctors, paramedics, and nurses undergoing high‐fidelity simulation of prehospital and interhospital aeromedical missions. Task load was measured using the National Aeronautics and Space Administration task load index (NASA‐TLX) administered following each simulation debrief. Prehospital and interhospital simulations were compared separately by building a multilevel model for complete case and all study data. Post hoc comparisons of NASA‐TLX score for each group were performed using estimated marginal means (EMMs).ResultsWe enrolled 70 participants, comprising 49 physicians (70%), 19 paramedics (27%), and two flight nurses (3%). From the complete case analysis, statistically significant differences were observed for total NASA‐TLX scores between active participants and directed observers in both prehospital (participant EMM 78, observer EMM 65, estimated difference −13, 95% confidence interval [CI] −20 to −7) and interhospital simulations (participant EMM 69, observer EMM 59, estimated difference −10, 95% CI −16 to −3). When all available data were included, the pattern of results did not change.ConclusionsIn our sample of senior clinicians, the task load experienced by both active participants and directed observers in high‐fidelity simulation education was high for both prehospital and interhospital simulation exercises. The statistically significant differences we report are unlikely to be practically significant. Our results support the use of directed observers when resource limitations do not allow all course attendees to participate in every simulation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.