282x Filetype PPTX File size 1.36 MB Source: www.nationalauditprojects.org.uk
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
A study of patient reports
• Not all AAGA is remembered
• Even light sedation prevents recall on recovery
• Patients can be responsive during GA but
remember nothing on recovery
100
80 From Russell (1993): 72% IFT
60 response, 0% postoperative
s 40 recall
t
n 20
e
t
a 0
p
l
e ry e l
s c a
% n e ri c
o g B e
r r
p u l
s s al d
e c e NAP5
r g t
T n e p
i r
F r
I u us om The 5th National Audit Project
d o r
n e p
ai n ■ ■ ■
a
p nt
po ■ ■
s
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
Memory for AAGA
Previous studies have • 1-2 per 1000
tried to elicit recall by • 1 in 3 reported > 1 week
repeatedly interviewing • Wide variation in
patients using the patients’ experiences of
modified Brice procedure AAGA
• Auditory perceptions are
common, as are feelings
of helplessness and fear
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
How memory works
• Why so few?
• Why the delay?
• Can we trust them?
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
Why so few memories?
• Memories are reconstructed not replayed
• Need to understand the experience:
Bransford & Johnson (1972)
• Need to know source of the memory
(otherwise imagination or dream)
• Need to have unique retrieval cues
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
Why is recall delayed?
• Memories are over-written by more recent
memories
• Shared retrieval cues
• AAGA patent regains consciousness at least
twice
NAP5
The 5th National Audit Project
■ ■ ■
■ ■
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.