Academic Publication of Anesthesiology From a Bibliographic Perspective From 1999 to 2018: Comparative Analysis Using Subject-Field Dataset and Department Dataset

Background: Publication activity in the field of anesthesiology informs decisions that enhance academic advancement. Most previous bibliometric studies on anesthesiology examined data limited to journals focused on anesthesiology rather than data answerable to authors in anesthesia departments. This study comprehensively explored publication trends in the field of anesthesiology and their impact. We hypothesized that anesthesiology's bibliometric scene would differ based on whether articles in the same study period were published in anesthesiology-focused journals or were produced by authors in anesthesia departments but published in non-specialty journals.Methods: This cross-sectional study used bibliometric data from the Science Citation Index Expanded database between 1999 and 2018. Two datasets were assembled. The first dataset was a subject-dataset (articles published in 31 journals in the anesthesiology category of InCites Journal Citation Reports in 2018); the second dataset was the department-dataset (articles published in the Science Citation Index Expanded by authors in anesthesia departments). We captured the bibliographical record of each article in both datasets and noted each article's Institute for Scientific Information code, publication year, title, abstract, author addresses, subject category, and references for further study.Results: A total of 69,593 articles were published—cited 1,497,932 times—in the subject-dataset; a total of 167,501 articles were published—cited 3,731,540 times—in the department-dataset. The results demonstrate differences between the two datasets. First, the number of articles was stagnant, with little growth (average annual growth rate = 0.31%) in the subject-dataset; whereas there was stable growth (average annual growth rate = 4.50%) in articles in the department-dataset. Second, only 30.4% of anesthesia department articles were published in anesthesiology journals. Third, journals related to “pain” had the lowest department-subject ratio, which was attributable to a large portion of non-anesthesia department researchers' participation in related research.Conclusions: This study showed that articles published in anesthesiology-focused and non-specialty journals demonstrate fundamentally different trends. Thus, it not only helps researchers develop a more comprehensive understanding of the current publication status and trends in anesthesiology, but also provides a basis for national academic organizations to frame relevant anesthesiology development policies and rationalize resource allocation.

NURSES’ COMPLIANCE ON PATIENT HANDOVER PROCESS IN THE PRE-OPERATIVE ROOM OF THE HOSPITAL IN VIETNAM

Background: Ineffective handover is considered a major factor that endangers patient safety in hospitals. Preparing and handing over patients before surgeries directly impact the outcome of the surgery. If errors occur, they could jeopardize the patient’s life.Objectives: To determine the level of nurses’ compliance during the pre-operative patient handover process at the anesthesia department. To examine nurses’ evaluation on using a pre-operative patient handover checklist.Methods: This was a descriptive observational study with a cross-sectional approach to examine 196 cases of handing over pre-operative patients performed by 53 nurses from the surgical department, maternity department, obstetrics and gynecology department, emergency department, and anesthesia department. Data were collected from November 2019 to February 2020 using “The Checklist of Assessing Nurse’s Compliance on Pre-Operative Patient Handover” and “The Survey Form of Nurse’s Evaluation on Using Pre-Operative Patient Handover Checklist.” Descriptive statistics, including frequencies and percentages, were used for data analysis.Results: Nurses’ compliance on handing over pre-operative patients with a high level was 71.9%, and with an average level was 28.1%. The handover areas with low compliance rate included: the patients need to be isolated (63.3%), identifying patient information verbally (75%), identifying patient information by hospital bracelet (77%), time to use antibiotics (78.1%), and marked surgical site (79.6%). Over 90% of nurses agreed on the usefulness of the pre-operative handover checklist.Conclusion: The process of handing over pre-operative patients was performed relatively well, but there were still shortcomings to overcome. Nurses positively evaluated the use of the handover checklist for preparing pre-operative patients.