Anxiety on induction of general anaesthesia

  • Research type

    Research Study

  • Full title

    An observational study of the effects of anaesthetic room interventions on patient anxiety and their perceptions of a general anaesthetic

  • IRAS ID

    210363

  • Contact name

    Andrew Lumb

  • Contact email

    a.lumb@leeds.ac.uk

  • Sponsor organisation

    Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust

  • Duration of Study in the UK

    0 years, 6 months, 30 days

  • Research summary

    Increasing focus on anaesthetic safety in the last two decades has led to more interventions being performed in the anaesthetic room to keep the patient safe as they go to sleep, including the administration of oxygen and increased use of monitoring equipment, commonly leading to audible alarms sounding. Around three quarters of patients already experience substantial preoperative anxiety, as measured an hour before induction of anaesthesia. It is possible that these additional safety interventions at induction will exacerbate this anxiety, particularly if the alarms are not quickly dealt with or explained by the staff, potentially adversely affecting the patient’s experience. This study aims to quantify the level of anxiety experienced by patients immediately before unconsciousness and to observe whether the practical interventions used by the anaesthetist in the anaesthetic room affect these anxiety levels or the patient's perception of the anaesthetic induction. Anaesthetic room interventions will be quantified by direct observation by an investigator who is not involved in the patient’s care. Patient anxiety will be assessed by both quantitative and qualitative measures including comparison of heart rate and blood pressure between the pre-operative values and those immediately before unconsciousness, by asking the patient to complete a standard anxiety screening questionnaire and answer free text questions about their experience, and a visual analogue scale for anxiety. A small number of more detailed structured interviews a few days after the procedure will be used to explore the patient experience in more detail.

  • REC name

    London - Surrey Borders Research Ethics Committee

  • REC reference

    16/LO/1936

  • Date of REC Opinion

    18 Oct 2016

  • REC opinion

    Favourable Opinion