Record of anaesthetic machine check

Authors


  • A response to a previously published article or letter can be submitted to the Online Correspondence section at http://www.anaesthesiacorrespondence.com. A selection of this correspondence is published several times a year in Anaesthesia. All correspondence intended for publication in Anaesthesia should be addressed to Dr David Bogod, Editor-in-Chief, and submitted as an e-mail attachment to anaesthesia@nottingham.ac.uk. For multi-author letters, a covering letter signed by all authors must be submitted either by post, fax (44 (0) 115 962 7670) or by e-mail as a scanned document before correspondence can be published. Alternatively, letters may be submitted typewritten on one side of paper, double spaced with wide margins to Anaesthesia, 1st Floor, Maternity Unit, Nottingham City Hospital, Hucknall Road, Nottingham, NG5 1PB, UK. All paper submissions must include a signed covering letter, a disc or CD-ROM with a Word for Windows or .rtf version of the letter and an email address for the corresponding author. Copy should be prepared in the usual style of the Correspondence section. Authors must follow the advice about references and other matters contained in the Author Guidelines at http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journals/ana/submiss.htm. Correspondence presented in any other style or format will be returned to the author for revision.

The AAGBI guidelines for checking the anaesthetic machine states that ‘a clear note must be made in the patient’s anaesthetic record that the anaesthetic machine check has been performed, that appropriate monitoring is in place and functional, and that the integrity, patency and safety of the whole breathing system has been assured. There must also be a logbook kept with each anaesthetic machine to record the daily presession check and weekly check of the oxygen failure alarm' [1]. In a recent audit at the East Surrey Hospital, we noted the completion of documentation regarding the anaesthetic machine check. At our hospital a logbook is kept next to each anaesthetic machine and a space is also provided on the anaesthetic chart to document the machine check.

The audit showed that the log book had been completed on 19% of occasions (August 2005-December 2005) and the anaesthetic chart had been completed on 90% of occasions (100 charts). There was also a disparity between the morning and afternoon session. In the morning, 46% of the machine checks were documented but only 6% in the afternoon. We presume the reason for the difference between logbook and anaesthetic chart is because the anaesthetic chart is ‘to hand’ and familiar to the anaesthetist.

Perhaps the AAGBI should alter the guidelines to advise that documentation on the anaesthetic chart is an adequate alternative to maintaining an anaesthetic machine logbook?

Ancillary