Quality improvement in anaesthesiology


  • Maruti Gupta Department of of Anaesthesiology, Command Hospital, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India




Clinical indicators, Healthcare provider, Indicator programs, Perioperative care, Quality improvement, Quality measurement


In recent times, numerous efforts have been made in the field of medicine to improve the methodology of measuring and reporting the quality of care delivered to patients. Most of these efforts have been executed in the western population, because of an efficient system of Incident Reporting. Quality Measurement in healthcare typically means quantifying processes of care that have a direct relationship to positive health outcomes. Quality in anaesthesia is usually measured by perioperative mortality, morbidity and Incidents. Quality measurement is not only important for the clientele but also for the employer, to make choices and healthcare provider to introspect his performance. It is an effective method of giving feedback to anaesthesiologists, doctors and paramedical staff to address quality issues and bring about improvement. Without Quality Measurement, improvement in quality, if at all, would be expected to be very slow and clientele would be blindfolded in taking important decisions pertaining to health care. The concepts of quality assurance and quality control are rapidly gaining popularity in surgical sciences as the society is heading towards social, technical and clinical advancements globally. In times to come, quality of anaesthesia services will be closely monitored by quality indicators and will become a benchmark for assessment of the healthcare provider and the hospital. At present, the need of the hour is to devise ways and means to measure the quality of care being provided by the healthcare provider and adopt these evolutionary practices aimed at improving anaesthesia delivery services in a medical setup.


Bainbridge D, Martin J, Arango M, Cheng D. Evidence-based Peri-operative Clinical Outcomes Research (EPiCOR) Group. Perioperative and anaesthetic-related mortality in developed and developing countries: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 2012;380(9847):1075-81.

World Health Organisation. Safe Surgery. Available at: www.who.int/patientsafety/topics/safe-surgery/en.

Whitty PM, Shaw IH, Goodwin DR. Patient satisfaction with general anaesthesia. Too difficult to measure?. Anaesthesia. 1996;51(4):327-32.

Heidegger T, Husemann Y, Nuebling M. Patient satisfaction with anaesthesia care: Development of a psychometric questionnaire and benchmarking among six hospitals in Switzerland and Austria. Brit J Anaesth. 2002;89(6):863-72.

Kelley ET, Arispe I, Holmes J. Healthcare Quality Indicators Project and the US National Health Care. Int J Qual Health Care. 2006;18(1):45-51.

Gabel RA. Evolution of joint commission anaesthesia clinical indicators. ASA Newsletter. 1994;58:24-9.

Warltier DC. Anaesthesia Safety: Model or Myth?. Anesthesiol. 2002;97(6):1609-17.

Donabedian A. Evaluating quality of medical care. Millbank Q. 1996;44(3):166-206.

Brook RH, McGlynn EA, Shekelle PG. Defining and measuring quality of care: A perspective from US researchers. Int J Qual Heal Care. 2000;12(4):281-95.

Haller G, Stoelwinder J, Paul SM. Quality and safety indicators in anaesthesia. Anaesthesiol. 2009;110(5):1158-75.

Clemmer TP, Spuhler VJ, Oniki TA, Horn SD. Results of a collaborative quality improvement programme on outcomes and costs in a tertiary critical care unit. Crit Care Med. 1999;27(9);1768-74.

Benn J, Arnold G, Wei I. Using quality indicators in anaesthesia: Feeding back data to improve care. Brit J Anaes. 2012;109(1):80-91.




How to Cite

Gupta, M. (2019). Quality improvement in anaesthesiology. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 7(8), 3216–3218. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20193423



Review Articles