163x 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.