Background:The Royal College of Anesthesiologists of Thailand (RCAT) performed large-scale epidemiologic study of anesthesia-related complications and national incidents study in 2004 and 2007, respectively. Objectives: Evaluate the anesthesia service in Thailand with regard to status of quality and patient safety. Material and methods: A pre-planned structured questionnaire regarding demographic, administrative, preanesthetic, intraoperative postanesthetic variables and complications were requested to be filled in by nurse anesthetists attending the refresher course lecture of RCAT in February 2008. Descriptive statistics was used. Results: Three hundred fifty questionnaires were given and 341 respondents (97%) returned the questionnaires. Most of the respondents (90%) worked in government section. Thirty percent of respondents practiced in hospital without medical doctor anesthesiologist and 58% of nurse anesthetists worked in hospitals that have been accredited. Forty-six percent of respondents reported unavailability of a 24-hour recovery room. The questionnaires revealed of inadequacy of anesthesia personnel (64%), inadequate supervision during emergency condition (53%), inadequacy of patient information regarding anesthesia (57-69%), and low opportunity for patient to choose choice of anesthesia (19%). The commonly used monitoring were pulse oximeter (92% of respondents) and electrocardiography (63%). One-third (32%) of respondents had to provide of anesthesia for patients with insufficient NPO (non per oral) time. Common problems that the respondents experienced were miscommunication (49%), intraoperative cardiac arrest during the past year (35%), error related to infusion pump (24%) and medication error (8%). Fifty-five percent of respondents had to monitor at least one patient per month receiving spinal anesthesia. Conclusion: Suggested strategies for quality and patient safety improvement in anesthesia service are increasing personnel, increasing 24-hour recovery room, improvement of supervision, improvement of communication, compliance to guidelines and improvement of nurse anesthetist's training regarding monitoring patient receiving spinal anesthesia and cardiopulmonary resuscitation.

Background: Currently, there is a considerable variation concerning the provision of preanesthetic-risk information, especially potential detrimental adverse outcomes. Objective: Determine the effects of printed anesthetic-risk information before surgery including patients’ anxiety, refusal of surgery, knowledge perception of adverse events and factors affecting anxiety. Methods: Patients in a university hospital, a tertiary care hospital, a secondary care hospital, and a neurological institute in Thailand, undergoing low-to-moderate risk surgery were randomly allocated to control group (C) and study group (S), where group C received printed general information in anesthesia, and group S received printed incidences of five anesthetic adverse events as sore throat, nausea/vomiting, tooth loss, not waking up after surgery, cardiac arrest. Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory Scale (STAIS, STAIT) for anxiety and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for knowledge perception were recorded before and after information, and after surgery. Numbers of patients who refused surgery and needed anesthetic-risk information in the next surgery were also recorded. STAIS >45 were considered “high anxiety”. Results: Eight-hundred and twenty-four patients were analyzed (group C: 414, group S: 410). There was no difference in age, sex, ASA physical status, salary, education level, habitat, anesthetic experience and operative risk between groups. STAIS and STAIT, proportion of patients with high anxiety, proportion of patients who refused surgery were not different between groups. Patients in control group needed anesthetic-risk information in the next surgery more than study group (p <0.001). VAS for knowledge about five adverse events in study group were significantly higher than control group (p <0.001). Risk factors by the multivariate analysis included patients with high baseline trait anxiety and low income of less than 10,000 Baht/month. Conclusion: Printed anesthetic-risk information did not increase anxiety, but increased knowledge perception of the patients.