Re:Transcontinental anaesthesia: a pilot study (2013)
by veritas3241 on Tuesday November 01, 2016 @01:55PM
(#12848448)
> What better monitoring and tools should provide is better quality anesthesia, which is a whole big story in itself with many interesting components.
To add to this, my wife is studying to be a Nurse Anesthetist and I'm always amazed that there are plenty of docs who insist on using the intubation tool that doesn't have a camera vs the one that does. I'd say around 20-50% the time they have to get the one with the camera to help out anyways. Why not just use the one with the camera if it's there.
There's a lot of value to be added in the complementarity of humans and machines, particularly in anesthesia.
The personnel really has to have a holistic understanding how the patient is doing and not just look at one number on a screen.
I would go the exactly opposite direction.
What better monitoring and tools should provide is better quality anesthesia, which is a whole big story in itself with many interesting components.
For example if you can monitor better, you don't need to give so much drugs "just to be sure". This has all kinds of benefits like faster recovery for the patient.
(Disclaimer: I've worked in a very related field.)