Category Archives: Research

First Annual CSA President’s Impact Awards

2023 is the 75th anniversary of the California Society of Anesthesiologists (CSA)! In addition to celebratory events, CSA is also introducing the 1st annual CSA President’s Impact Awards. This is an important new initiative developed by the CSA Membership Committee and other CSA leaders, and I am thrilled to provide a little more detail about these awards, which be presented at the CSA annual meeting in San Diego this April. 

It will come as no surprise that I love being an anesthesiologist – a blog post of mine about this from a few years ago is probably the only thing I have written that people may have actually read! One unique aspect about our work as anesthesiologists is that it often takes place in the background. The important decisions we make, and the planning and anticipation involved, may make the difference between life and death for our patients, but they often go unnoticed. As I wrote in the KevinMD blog, “No one claps when the plane lands, just as no one expects any less than a perfect uncomplicated anesthetic every time.”

Doing our jobs without the need for attention or validation is one of the attributes about anesthesiologists that I love the most. We practice our specialized form of personalized medicine every day, drawing our own satisfaction from the positive outcomes of our patients, whether or not we get the credit. However, what we do makes a profound difference in the lives of our patients and their families, our health systems, and our communities.

We see you!

During this Diamond Jubilee 75th Anniversary year, we are starting a new annual tradition of recognizing the incredible work performed by CSA members through the new CSA President’s Impact Awards, and you can help!

Using this form, nominate your colleagues and/or trainees in the following categories: 

  • Educator of the Year – for excellence in educating colleagues, trainees, other healthcare professionals, patients, or the community
  • Physician Advocate of the Year – for outstanding leadership in legislative advocacy or practice management
  • Clinical Innovator of the Year – for creative innovation that has led to improvements in clinical care, patient safety, healthcare processes, patient experience, or outcomes
  • Rising Star – for an early career member (less than 3 years from completion of training) who has already demonstrated excellence and tremendous future career potential in one or more of the above categories: educator; physician advocate; or clinical innovation
  • Resident/Fellow of the Year – for a current resident or fellow who has demonstrated excellence in one or more of the above categories: educator; physician advocate; or clinical innovation

Nominees must be CSA members, and nominations must be submitted using this form. Nominate your colleagues and trainees for the CSA President’s Impact Awards today!

The deadline for nominations is Monday, February 6th.

Related Posts:

Do Journal Club Better (Tips for Dissecting a Clinical Research Article)

Journal club is a common teaching format used within academic programs to review recently published literature or other key articles selected within a specific domain. Journal clubs tend to be fairly informal and are amenable to small group in-person sessions, or they can be conducted virtually. An innovative hybrid format combining the traditional in-person departmental discussion with input from participants on social media has also been described. While there is no “right way” to run a journal club, it is helpful for moderators and presenters to use a structured approach to tackle a scientific article strategically and facilitate discussion.

The following tips are only suggestions. Clinical research has been my focus area, but this structure for interpreting a journal article may apply to other areas of research as well.

Background: Do the authors summarize previously published studies leading up to the present study? What don’t we already know about this topic?

  1. Do the authors do a good job justifying the reason for the study? This should not be lengthy if there is clearly a need for the study.
  2. Do the authors present a hypothesis? What is it?
  3. What is the primary aim/objective of the study? Do the authors specific secondary aims/objectives?

Study Design: Do the authors explicitly state the design used in the present study? If so, what is it?

Retrospective (“case-control study”): Starts with the outcome then looks back in time for exposure to risk factors or interventions.

  1. Can calculate odds ratios to estimate relative risk.
  2. Cannot calculate risk/incidence (not prospective).

Cross-sectional (“prevalence study”): Takes a snapshot of risk factors and outcome of interest at one point in time or over a specific period of time.

  1. Can calculate prevalence.
  2. Cannot calculate risk/incidence (not longitudinal).

Prospective: Considered the gold standard for clinical research. Studies may be observational or interventional/experimental. Check if the study is prospectively registered (e.g., clinicaltrials.gov) because most journals expect this. Even systematic reviews are encouraged to register prospectively now. the site PROSPERO is based in the United Kingdom.

Observational (“cohort study”).

  1. May or may not have a designated control group (can start with defined group and risk factors are discovered over time such as the Framingham Study).
  2. Can calculate incidence and relative risk for certain risk factors.
  3. Identify potential causal associations.

Interventional/Experimental (“clinical trial”).

  1. What is the intervention or experiment?
  2. Is there blinding? If so, who is blinded:  single, double, or triple (statistician blinded)?
  3. Are the groups randomized? How is this performed?
  4. Is there a sample size estimate and what is it based on (alpha and beta error, population mean and SD, expected effect size)? This should be centered around the primary outcome.
  5. What are the study groups? Are the groups independent or related?
  6. Is there a control group such as a placebo (for efficacy studies) or active comparator (standard of care)?

Measurements: How are the outcome variables operationalized? Check the validity, precision, and accuracy of the measurement tools (e.g., survey or measurement scale).

  1. Validity: Has the tool been used before? Is it reliable? Does the tool make sense (face validity)? Is the tool designed to measure the outcome of interest (construct validity)?
  2. Precision: Does the tool hit the target?
  3. Accuracy: Are the results reproducible?

Analysis: What statistical tests are used and are they appropriate? How do the authors define statistical significance (p-value or confidence intervals)? How are the results presented in the paper and are they clear?

  1. Categorical variables with independent groups: for 1 outcome and 2 groups, investigators commonly use the Chi square test (exact tests are used when n<5 in any field); for multiple outcomes or multiple groups, Kruskal Wallis with pairwise comparisons may be used although there are other options.
  2. Continuous variables with independent groups: for 1 outcome and 2 groups, investigators commonly use Student’s t test (if normal distribution) or Mann-Whitney U test (if distribution not normal); for multiple outcomes or multiple groups, analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post-hoc multiple comparisons testing; for multiple outcomes and multiple groups, especially with retrospective cohorts, regression modeling is often employed.
  3. Continuous variables with related groups (not independent): paired t test or repeated-measures ANOVA depending on the number of outcomes and groups.
  4. Are the results statistically significant? Clinically significant? Did the authors explain what they considered the minimal clinically important difference?
  5. Do the results make sense? Anything surprising or noteworthy?

Conclusions: I personally tend to skip the discussion section of the paper at first and come up with my own conclusions based on the study results; then I read what the authors have to say later.

  1. Did the authors succeed in proving what they set out to prove?
  2. Read the discussion section. Do you agree with the authors’ conclusions?
  3. What are possible future studies based on the results of the present study, and how would you design the next study?

Related Posts:

You Are Not “Asleep” Under Anesthesia

“You will be asleep for your surgery,” anesthesiologists often reassure their patients. Just before the start of anesthesia, a patient may hear the operating room nurse saying, “Think of a nice dream as you go off to sleep.”

While these statements are intended to soothe patients during a stressful time, they gloss over this critical fact: Anesthesia is not like normal sleep at all. 

That’s why you need medical doctors – anesthesiologists – to take care of you under anesthesia, and why you don’t need us when you’re sleeping comfortably in your own bed.

Differences between natural sleep and general anesthesia

Natural sleep represents an active though resting brain state. Every 90 minutes, the brain cycles between rapid eye movement or “REM” sleep and non-REM sleep. During each of these REM cycles, the brain is active, and dreams can take place. The rest and rejuvenation that result from getting a good night’s sleep are essential for overall health and wellbeing.

On the other hand, general anesthesia produces a brain wave pattern known as “burst-suppression,” where brief clusters of fast waves alternate with periods of minimal activity. In a recent article published in Frontiers in Psychology, Drs. Akshay Shanker and Emery Brown explain brain wave patterns found in patients under general anesthesia. They are similar to those of critically ill patients who fall into a coma, have a dangerously low body temperature, or suffer from other serious diseases. Under general anesthesia, patients do not dream.

Confusing general anesthesia and natural sleep seems innocent but can be dangerous. A person who falls into natural sleep doesn’t require constant monitoring or observation. A patient under anesthesia, like an intensive care unit patient in a coma, may appear peaceful and relaxed, but anesthetic drugs don’t produce natural sleep and may cause breathing to stop or have other serious side effects.  Some may recall that Michael Jackson died at home while receiving the anesthetic drug propofol in his veins without an anesthesiologist nearby to protect him.

For patients with chronic health problems, having surgery and anesthesia can put significant stress on the body. Anesthesia gases and medications can temporarily decrease the heart’s pumping ability and affect blood flow to the liver and kidneys. Patients under general anesthesia often need a breathing tube and a ventilator to breathe for them and support their lungs with oxygen.

Respect anesthesia, but don’t fear it

While having anesthesia and surgery should never be taken lightly, anesthesia care today is very safe as long as it is directed by a physician specializing in anesthesiology: an anesthesiologist. Anesthesiology is a medical specialty just like cardiology, surgery, or pediatrics. Research by anesthesiologists has led to the development of better monitors, better training using simulation methods inspired by the aviation industry, and new medications and techniques to give safer pain relief.

As a medical specialty, anesthesiology focuses on improving patient safety, outcomes and experiences.  Anesthesiologists work with surgeons and other healthcare professionals to get you or your family member ready for surgery, designing an anesthesia care and pain management plan specific to the type of operation you need. The anesthesia plan will guide your care during your procedure and throughout your recovery. While general anesthesia is far different from natural sleep, the job of the anesthesiologist is to make sure that you wake up just the same.

This post has also been featured on KevinMD.com.

Related Posts:

Conference Cancelled Due to COVID-19? Go Virtual!

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the usual spring meeting season for medical societies never got started. In San Francisco, all events hosting more than 1000 people were prohibited. As a result, the 2020 annual ASRA regional anesthesiology and acute pain medicine meeting was cancelled.

However, there were nearly 400 scientific abstract posters submitted to the meeting and posted online. For so many registered attendees, the ASRA meeting was an opportunity to share their latest research and medically challenging cases with their colleagues and solicit feedback.

Continue reading Conference Cancelled Due to COVID-19? Go Virtual!

There was no way to preserve the complex structure of an ASRA meeting (e.g., workshops, plenary lectures, problem-based learning discussion, networking sessions), but a moderated poster session was feasible using common videoconferencing applications. The Chair of the 2019 ASRA spring meeting, Dr. Raj Gupta, took it to the next level by using StreamYard to simultaneously broadcast the video feed to multiple social media platforms (e.g., Twitter/Periscope, Facebook, YouTube). In addition to accessing the livestream for free, participants could make comments and pose questions to the speakers and moderator through their social media applications.

Dr. Gupta hosted 6 sessions, and these were archived on YouTube for later viewing. As an example, here is one session focused on regional anesthesia abstracts in which I participated:

Although it was disappointing to not have an ASRA spring meeting this year, something good came out of it. The livestreamed poster discussions were an innovative way to showcase the science and educational cases as well as leverage social media to attract a global audience. Since medical conferences may never completely return to pre-COVID normal, embracing technology and incorporating online sessions should be considered by continuing medical education planners going forward.

Related Posts:

My Top Ten Articles for #RAUK20

I have the honor of being the next Bruce Scott Lecturer for the 2020 Regional Anaesthesia United Kingdom (RA-UK) meeting in Sheffield on May 18 and 19, 2020.

As part of the preparation for what will be a fantastic conference filled with the latest education in regional anesthesia, point-of-care ultrasound, acute pain management, and social media for medical education, Dr. Amit Pawa has started a thread on Twitter featuring my “Top Ten” published articles.

I hope to see you at #RAUK20! You can access the thread and check out the list of articles by clicking the tweet below:

Related Posts:

My Favorite Rejections

I tweeted recently about the idea of keeping a “failure resume” which was recommended by an article published in the New York Times.

If I have learned one thing in academics, it’s this – you have to develop thick skin.

Continue reading My Favorite Rejections

Success in scientific journal publication is built on a pile of rejections. For every trainee and junior faculty member out there, know that your mentors have survived countless rejections (failures) to get to where they are today.

Rather than bemoan these rejections, perhaps we should celebrate them instead. Each failure can be a learning opportunity. I dug through some old emails to find a few of my favorite rejections and happily share them below. They fall into one of two general themes.

Theme 1: “It’s not you. It’s me.”

Theme 2: “It’s not me. It’s you.”

Don’t let these rejections get you down. Good research and good writing will eventually find a home in a journal. If you get stuck, reach out to a mentor for guidance. When you see your article published finally, you can look back at those earlier rejections as badges of honor and proof that persistence pays off.

Related Posts:

Why We Should Worry about Drug Shortages in Regional Anesthesia

The crisis of prescription opioid overuse and abuse has affected countries around the world, and anesthesiologists are well-positioned to make positive changes (1).  Even minor outpatient surgical procedures, and their associated anesthesia and analgesia techniques, can lead to long-term opioid use (2,3).  Patients who present for surgery with an active opioid prescription are very likely to still be on opioids after a year (4).

Anesthesiologists have been working to set up regional anesthesiology and acute pain medicine programs with careful coordination of inpatient and outpatient pain management to improve patient outcomes.  Regional anesthesia, especially with continuous peripheral nerve block (CPNB) techniques, has been shown repeatedly to reduce patients’ need for opioid analgesia (5).

Today, the crisis of drug shortages threatens to reverse the many advances in perioperative pain control that have been achieved.  Local anesthetics or “numbing medications” represent a class of drugs that is our strongest weapon against opioids.  These drugs (e.g., bupivacaine, lidocaine, ropivacaine) are currently in shortage.  Targeted injections of local anesthetic in the form of regional anesthesia eliminate sensation at the site of surgery and can obviate the need for injectable opioids (e.g., fentanyl, hydromorphone, morphine) which also happen to be in short supply.  Local anesthetics are also the critical ingredient in providing epidural pain relief and spinal anesthesia for childbirth.  Without them, new moms will miss the first moments of their babies’ lives.

The following are potential ramifications of the current drug shortages affecting anesthesia and pain management on patient care:

Decreased Quality of Acute Pain Management

Regional anesthesia techniques, which include spinal, epidural, and peripheral nerve blocks, offer patients many potential advantages in the perioperative and peripartum period.  Human studies have demonstrated the following benefits: decreased pain, nausea and vomiting, and time spent in the recovery room (6,7).  Long-acting local anesthetics (e.g., bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, and ropivacaine) generally provide analgesia of similar duration for 24 hours or less (8-11).  These clinical effects of nerve blocks typically last long enough for patients to meet discharge eligibility from recovery and avoid unnecessary hospitalization for pain control (12).  CPNB techniques (also known as perineural catheters) permit delivery of local anesthetic solutions to the site of a peripheral nerve on an ongoing basis (13).  Portable infusion devices can deliver a solution of plain local anesthetic for days after surgery, often with the ability to titrate the dose up and down or even stop the infusion temporarily when patients feel too numb (14,15).  In a meta-analysis comparing CPNB to single-injection peripheral nerve blocks in humans, CPNB results in lower patient-reported worst pain scores and pain scores at rest on postoperative day (POD) 0, 1, and 2 (16).  Patients who receive CPNB also experience less nausea, consume less opioids, sleep better, and are more satisfied with pain management (16).  By using local anesthetic medication to interrupt nerve transmission along peripheral nerves, patients continue to experience decreased sensation as long as the infusion is running.  A shortage of local anesthetic medications makes it impossible for anesthesiologists to provide this potent form of opioid-sparing pain control for all surgical patients.  This also means that local anesthetics cannot be administered by surgeons as wound infiltration to help patients with incisional pain, and epidural analgesia for laboring women may not be universally available.

Increased Incidence of Postoperative Complications

Based on the study by Memtsoudis and colleagues, overall 30-day mortality for total knee arthroplasty patients is lower for patients who receive regional anesthesia, either neuraxial and combined neuraxial-general anesthesia, compared to general anesthesia alone (17).  In most categories, the rates of occurrence of in-hospital complications (e.g. all-cause infections, pulmonary, cardiovascular, acute renal failure) are also lower for the neuraxial and combined neuraxial-general anesthesia groups vs. the general anesthesia only group, and transfusion requirements are lowest for neuraxial anesthesia patients compared to all other groups (17).  The inability to offer regional anesthesia (e.g., spinal or epidural) to all patients due to lack of local anesthetics therefore represents a threat to patient safety.

Increased Risk of Persistent Postsurgical Pain

Chronic pain may develop after many common operations including breast surgery, cesarean delivery, hernia repair, thoracic surgery, and amputation and is associated with severe acute pain in the postoperative period (18).  A Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis reviewed published studies on this subject, and the results favor epidural analgesia for prevention of persistent postsurgical pain (PPSP) after thoracotomy and favor paravertebral block for prevention of PPSP after breast cancer surgery at 6 months (19).  Only regional blockade with local anesthetics can block patients’ sensation during and after surgery.  Without local anesthetics for nerve blocks, spinals, and epidurals, patients will experience greater than expected acute pain, require additional opioid treatment, and potentially be at higher risk of developing chronic pain.

Increased Health Care Costs

Approximately 31% of costs related to inpatient perioperative care is attributable to the ward admission (20).  Anesthesiologists as perioperative physicians have an opportunity to influence the cost of surgical care by decreasing hospital length of stay through effective pain management and by developing coordinated multi-disciplinary clinical pathways (21,22).  Regional anesthesia and analgesia can improve outcomes through integration into clinical pathways that involve a multipronged approach to streamlining surgical care (23,24).  Inadequate pain control can delay rehabilitation, prolong hospital admissions, increase the rate of readmissions (25), and increase the costs of hospitalization for surgical patients.

In summary, regional anesthesia and analgesia has been shown in multiple studies to improve outcomes for obstetric and surgical patients.  The current shortage of local anesthetics and other analgesic medications negatively affects quality of care and pain management and is a threat to patient safety.

References

  1. Alam A, Juurlink DN. The prescription opioid epidemic: an overview for anesthesiologists. Can J Anaesth 2016;63:61-8.
  2. Sun EC, Darnall BD, Baker LC, Mackey S. Incidence of and Risk Factors for Chronic Opioid Use Among Opioid-Naive Patients in the Postoperative Period. JAMA internal medicine 2016;176:1286-93.
  3. Rozet I, Nishio I, Robbertze R, Rotter D, Chansky H, Hernandez AV. Prolonged opioid use after knee arthroscopy in military veterans. Anesth Analg 2014;119:454-9.
  4. Mudumbai SC, Oliva EM, Lewis ET, Trafton J, Posner D, Mariano ER, Stafford RS, Wagner T, Clark JD. Time-to-Cessation of Postoperative Opioids: A Population-Level Analysis of the Veterans Affairs Health Care System. Pain Med 2016;17:1732-43.
  5. Richman JM, Liu SS, Courpas G, Wong R, Rowlingson AJ, McGready J, Cohen SR, Wu CL. Does continuous peripheral nerve block provide superior pain control to opioids? A meta-analysis. Anesth Analg 2006;102:248-57.
  6. Liu SS, Strodtbeck WM, Richman JM, Wu CL. A comparison of regional versus general anesthesia for ambulatory anesthesia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Anesth Analg 2005;101:1634-42.
  7. McCartney CJ, Brull R, Chan VW, Katz J, Abbas S, Graham B, Nova H, Rawson R, Anastakis DJ, von Schroeder H. Early but no long-term benefit of regional compared with general anesthesia for ambulatory hand surgery. Anesthesiology 2004;101:461-7.
  8. Casati A, Borghi B, Fanelli G, Cerchierini E, Santorsola R, Sassoli V, Grispigni C, Torri G. A double-blinded, randomized comparison of either 0.5% levobupivacaine or 0.5% ropivacaine for sciatic nerve block. Anesth Analg 2002;94:987-90, table of contents.
  9. Hickey R, Hoffman J, Ramamurthy S. A comparison of ropivacaine 0.5% and bupivacaine 0.5% for brachial plexus block. Anesthesiology 1991;74:639-42.
  10. Klein SM, Greengrass RA, Steele SM, D’Ercole FJ, Speer KP, Gleason DH, DeLong ER, Warner DS. A comparison of 0.5% bupivacaine, 0.5% ropivacaine, and 0.75% ropivacaine for interscalene brachial plexus block. Anesth Analg 1998;87:1316-9.
  11. Fanelli G, Casati A, Beccaria P, Aldegheri G, Berti M, Tarantino F, Torri G. A double-blind comparison of ropivacaine, bupivacaine, and mepivacaine during sciatic and femoral nerve blockade. Anesth Analg 1998;87:597-600.
  12. Williams BA, Kentor ML, Vogt MT, Williams JP, Chelly JE, Valalik S, Harner CD, Fu FH. Femoral-sciatic nerve blocks for complex outpatient knee surgery are associated with less postoperative pain before same-day discharge: a review of 1,200 consecutive cases from the period 1996-1999. Anesthesiology 2003;98:1206-13.
  13. Ilfeld BM. Continuous peripheral nerve blocks: a review of the published evidence. Anesth Analg 2011;113:904-25.
  14. Ilfeld BM. Continuous peripheral nerve blocks in the hospital and at home. Anesthesiol Clin 2011;29:193-211.
  15. Ilfeld BM, Enneking FK. Continuous peripheral nerve blocks at home: a review. Anesth Analg 2005;100:1822-33.
  16. Bingham AE, Fu R, Horn JL, Abrahams MS. Continuous peripheral nerve block compared with single-injection peripheral nerve block: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2012;37:583-94.
  17. Memtsoudis SG, Sun X, Chiu YL, Stundner O, Liu SS, Banerjee S, Mazumdar M, Sharrock NE. Perioperative comparative effectiveness of anesthetic technique in orthopedic patients. Anesthesiology 2013;118:1046-58.
  18. Kehlet H, Jensen TS, Woolf CJ. Persistent postsurgical pain: risk factors and prevention. Lancet 2006;367:1618-25.
  19. Andreae MH, Andreae DA. Regional anaesthesia to prevent chronic pain after surgery: a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Anaesth 2013;111:711-20.
  20. Macario A, Vitez TS, Dunn B, McDonald T. Where are the costs in perioperative care? Analysis of hospital costs and charges for inpatient surgical care. Anesthesiology 1995;83:1138-44.
  21. Ilfeld BM, Mariano ER, Williams BA, Woodard JN, Macario A. Hospitalization costs of total knee arthroplasty with a continuous femoral nerve block provided only in the hospital versus on an ambulatory basis: a retrospective, case-control, cost-minimization analysis. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2007;32:46-54.
  22. Jakobsen DH, Sonne E, Andreasen J, Kehlet H. Convalescence after colonic surgery with fast-track vs conventional care. Colorectal disease : the official journal of the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland 2006;8:683-7.
  23. Macario A, Horne M, Goodman S, Vitez T, Dexter F, Heinen R, Brown B. The effect of a perioperative clinical pathway for knee replacement surgery on hospital costs. Anesth Analg 1998;86:978-84.
  24. Hebl JR, Kopp SL, Ali MH, Horlocker TT, Dilger JA, Lennon RL, Williams BA, Hanssen AD, Pagnano MW. A comprehensive anesthesia protocol that emphasizes peripheral nerve blockade for total knee and total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005;87 Suppl 2:63-70.
  25. Hernandez-Boussard T, Graham LA, Desai K, Wahl TS, Aucoin E, Richman JS, Morris MS, Itani KM, Telford GL, Hawn MT. The Fifth Vital Sign: Postoperative Pain Predicts 30-day Readmissions and Subsequent Emergency Department Visits. Ann Surg 2017;266:516-24.

Related Posts:

Why Physicians and Researchers Should Be on Twitter

If you are a physician or researcher and are not yet on Twitter, check out this infographic by Kellie Jaremko, MD, PhD (@Neuro_Kellie), then ask yourself, “Why not?”

If you still need more convincing,  this article may help.  Join the healthcare social media (#hcsm) movement!

Related Posts:

Tips for Live Tweeting a Meeting

Live tweeting during a scientific conference offers many benefits. For attendees at the meeting, it allows sharing of learning points from multiple concurrent sessions. This also decreases the incidence of “FOMO (Fear of Missing Out)” since you can only be in one session at any given time but can learn vicariously through others. For your Twitter community outside the meeting venue, your live tweeting can help to disseminate the key messages from the conference to a broader audience and ultimately may facilitate changes in clinical practice.

Check out these “Ten Simple Rules for Live Tweeting at Scientific Conferences” and Marie Ennis-O’Connor’s “15 Tips for Live Tweeting an Event” for a comprehensive overview of this subject.

Here are a couple of my own general rules to tweet by:

  1. Register your scientific conference hashtag on Symplur. This gives you access to free analytics and transcript services for a limited time.
  2. Be sure to use the correct conference hashtag and include it in all your tweets related to the conference. This is probably included in your conference materials or emails from the organizer. The hashtag allows others to easily find your tweets related to the conference and include your tweets in transcript summaries after the conference is over.
  3. Go for quality and not quantity. It is too difficult (and unnecessary) to give a phrase-by-phrase reproduction of a speaker’s entire lecture. Remember that you are primarily in attendance to learn, so make sure you spend most of your time listening and not tweeting. Consider summarizing two or three salient points into one tweet or tweeting photos of slides with a short commentary to provide context to your Twitter community.
  4. Give credit where credit is due. Do a little homework before tweeting. If a speaker has a Twitter handle, include it in your tweet. If the speaker references a relevant article, find the link and include it in your tweet. These elements make your tweet more informative to the reader and may increase the likelihood of its being retweeted or generating further conversation on Twitter.
  5. Don’t say anything in a tweet that you wouldn’t say to someone in public. Healthy debate is one of the best parts of scientific conferences, but keep the discussion on Twitter clean and professional and of course protect patient privacy and confidentiality.

Related Posts:

The “Top 10” Regional Anesthesia Articles of 2016

I was recently asked to provide a list of my “Top 10” regional anesthesia research articles from 2016 and not to include my own. So for what it’s worth (not much!), I’m sharing them below in no particular order.

In my humble opinion, these articles from 2016 have already influenced my clinical practice, taught me to look at something differently, or made me think of a new research question.

Trends in the Use of Regional Anesthesia: Neuraxial and Peripheral Nerve Blocks. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 Jan-Feb;41(1):43-9. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000342.

The Second American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Evidence-Based Medicine Assessment of Ultrasound-Guided Regional Anesthesia: Executive Summary. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2016 Mar-Apr;41(2):181-94. doi: 10.1097/AAP.0000000000000331.

Teaching ultrasound-guided regional anesthesia remotely: a feasibility study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2016 Aug;60(7):995-1002. doi: 10.1111/aas.12695.

Paravertebral block versus thoracic epidural for patients undergoing thoracotomy. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 Feb 21;2:CD009121. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009121.pub2.

Perineural versus intravenous dexamethasone as adjuncts to local anaesthetic brachial plexus block for shoulder surgery. Anaesthesia. 2016 Apr;71(4):380-8. doi: 10.1111/anae.13409.

Continuous Popliteal Sciatic Blocks: Does Varying Perineural Catheter Location Relative to the Sciatic Bifurcation Influence Block Effects? A Dual-Center, Randomized, Subject-Masked, Controlled Clinical Trial. Anesth Analg. 2016 May;122(5):1689-95. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001211.

A randomised controlled trial comparing meat-based with human cadaveric models for teaching ultrasound-guided regional anaesthesia. Anaesthesia. 2016 Aug;71(8):921-9. doi: 10.1111/anae.13446.

Adductor Canal Block Provides Noninferior Analgesia and Superior Quadriceps Strength Compared with Femoral Nerve Block in Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction. Anesthesiology. 2016 May;124(5):1053-64. doi: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000001045.

A radiologic and anatomic assessment of injectate spread following transmuscular quadratus lumborum block in cadavers. Anaesthesia. 2017 Jan;72(1):73-79. doi: 10.1111/anae.13647.

Regional Nerve Blocks Improve Pain and Functional Outcomes in Hip Fracture: A Randomized Controlled Trial. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2016 Dec;64(12):2433-2439. doi: 10.1111/jgs.14386.

Related Posts: