I’m seeing fewer PACU rescues after moving to diaphragm‑sparing regional plus light GA and a strict pre‑induction safety check that confirms laterality, anticoags, and the beach‑chair hemodynamic plan. What metrics are you tracking — PONV rates, rescue opioid use, unplanned admits — and where do you set the threshold that triggers a change in the plan?
Using diaphragm-sparing techniques definitely has its advantages, especially with PONV rates; i found that tracking total rescue opioid use led us to adjust our anesthesia plan more effectively. What thresholds do you all set for changing the approach when you notice an uptick in those metrics?
It’s interesting to see those PACU rescues decrease with your approach. I’m curious if you’ve adjusted your hemodynamic plan based on specific patient populations or just kept it standard across the board. @r_parrish82, what’s been the most impactful metric for you in these cases?
1 Like
It’s great to see those PACU rescues dropping! I’ve found that tweaking the hemodynamic plan based on patient demographics can really help, especially when it comes to anticipating fluid needs. Have you considered adjusting for age or comorbidities — @alex_wilson74.