Management of veterinary anaesthesia and analgesia in small animals: A survey of English-speaking practitioners in Canada.
<h4>Objective</h4>To describe how small animal anaesthesia and analgesia is performed in English-speaking Canada, document any variation among practices especially in relation to practice type and veterinarian's experience and compare results to published guidelines.<h4>Design...
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | article |
| Lenguaje: | EN |
| Publicado: |
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
2021
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/22ea29a9ad95462188afac7af8d80af0 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | <h4>Objective</h4>To describe how small animal anaesthesia and analgesia is performed in English-speaking Canada, document any variation among practices especially in relation to practice type and veterinarian's experience and compare results to published guidelines.<h4>Design</h4>Observational study, electronic survey.<h4>Sample</h4>126 respondents.<h4>Procedure</h4>A questionnaire was designed to assess current small animal anaesthesia and analgesia practices in English-speaking Canadian provinces, mainly in Ontario, Alberta and British Columbia. The questionnaire was available through SurveyMonkey® and included four parts: demographic information about the veterinarians surveyed, evaluation and management of anaesthetic risk, anaesthesia procedure, monitoring and safety. Year of graduation and type of practice were evaluated as potential risk factors. Exact chi-square tests were used to study the association between risk factors and the association between risk factors and survey responses. For ordinal data, the Mantel-Haenszel test was used instead.<h4>Results</h4>Response rate over a period of 3 months was 12.4% (126 respondents out of 1 016 invitations). Current anaesthesia and analgesia management failed to meet international guidelines for a sizable number of participants, notably regarding patient evaluation and preparation, safety and monitoring. Nearly one third of the participants still consider analgesia as optional for routine surgeries. Referral centres tend to follow guidelines more accurately and are better equipped than general practices.<h4>Conclusions and clinical relevance</h4>A proportion of surveyed Canadian English-speaking general practitioners do not follow current small animal anaesthesia and analgesia guidelines, but practitioners working in referral centres are closer to meet these recommendations. |
|---|