Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 14/11/2025This is the original graphic before I simplified it. Pale blue lines represent lowest risk of cross reactivity. 110
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 14/11/2025Ideally refer for testing to find safe agents. Odd that this was not done during previous skin testing. Otherwise pancuronium. 120
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 01/09/2025I didn’t define virtue signalling, I simply stated that complaining about alt text was being used to virtue signal. 100
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 01/09/2025If you think it’s dangerous to remove the tube use a flexible bronchoscope to exclude oesophageal intubation. 120
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 31/08/2025The incorporation of the Vortex into DAS 2018 was 3 fold: 1. Acknowledging the utility of the Vortex graphic as an adjunct to facilitate implementation of the guidelines. 2. The ability to approach choice of rescue lifelines non-linearly. 3. Prompts to optimise attempts 110
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 30/08/2025You keep saying you use the DAS guidelines & never hear the Vortex mentioned, yet the Vortex is mentioned in both the 2015 & 2018 DAS guidelines. Perhaps the greatest support the Vortex has ever had has been from DAS. They’re adjuncts not alternatives. 110
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 30/08/2025DAS acknowledged this in the 2015 @dasairway.bsky.social guidelines & incorporated the Vortex into their 2018 Critical Care guidelines. das.uk.com/guidelines/d... das.uk.com/guidelines/g... 032
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 16/08/2025SBP of 50mmHg is frightening. This study shows middle cerebral artery blood flow velocity decreases 50% w *MAP* < 60mmHg pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26879693/ 120
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 11/08/2025Didn’t we work out that the environmental impact of volatiles is actually “vanishingly small”? pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/38205585/ 310
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 06/08/2025Point 3 is the thrust of the editorial BUT to make that decision in a way that aligns with the patient’s rather than clinician’s values (thereby supporting patient autonomy rather than being paternalistic) a conversation about risk needs to be had. 122
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 06/08/2025Except that: 1. You don’t necessarily have to have the surgery. 2. Even if you do have the surgery there are multiple ways to do the same thing, each with different risks, that can be chosen according to complications which the patient is particularly vulnerable to or concerned about. 121
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 04/08/2025Montgomery also says "anything the clinician is or should reasonably be aware that a particular person would consider significant". So if you are aware or even suspect that a specific patient might have a particular (though objectively unreasonable) concern about, that's a material risk. 000
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 04/08/2025I'm far too young to remember that. 😉 (actually I loved the Rockford Files speaking of James Garner) 110
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 04/08/2025Awareness can be viewed as both a harmful outcome and a mechanism for harm. It's an unpleasant experience in its own right and a potential precipitant for psychological injury. 000
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 03/08/2025That’s a common approach but anyone can have awareness & it’s entirely reasonable for a patient to say “if I’d known that was a risk, I wouldn’t have had this done” (or would have asked if you could have done things differently to reduce the likelihood) about any rare catastrophic risk. 110
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 03/08/2025It doesn’t matter what the doctor considers a material risk, nor does it necessarily have to be a risk that a ‘reasonable person’ would consider material. It can just be something the doctor should reasonably be aware that a particular patient might consider significant (however unreasonably). 100
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 03/08/2025Categorical terms are unhelpful in isolation but can be useful in assoc w descriptors to aid conceptualisation. We speculate that it may be easier for pts to conceptualise likelihood if descriptors are framed in terms of how often clinicians encounter them cf proportion of pts experiencing them. 001
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 02/08/2025Here’s an example of how potentially harmful outcomes of anaesthesia can be categorised into 6 groups. From ‘The paradox of informed consent’. Free for a limited time in @anaesjournal.bsky.social 🔓🔑⏳ associationofanaesthetists-publications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1... 002
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 02/08/2025Yet 70L/min (mouth closed) consistently provides ETO2 >90% (while 70L/min mouth open is consistently crap) 120
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 02/08/2025But as the uncommon risks are the catastrophic ones it’s very difficult to mount an argument that they don’t constitute ‘material risks’ to the patient that necessitate consent. 010
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 02/08/2025When engaging in the consent process should we be alerting patients to *mechanisms* of harm or to harmful *outcomes*? ‘The paradox of informed consent’ Free full text in @anaesjournal.bsky.social for a limited time. associationofanaesthetists-publications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1... 112
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 01/08/2025I’m simply floating an idea. Consenting for mechanisms of harm has always been the convention but we should examine why we do this & whether or not it contributes to autonomous decision making. Perhaps we need to consent for consequences to the patient instead. 021
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 01/08/2025That’s a bit different from the original 1985 description. Even after 3 got altered & 4 added w the Samsoon modification in 1987, I’ve never heard of the tonsils getting involved! 310
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 31/07/2025From the ‘similar articles’ it seems it’s been done quite a lot, with a distinct theme emerging… I love “fair interrater reliability beyond that expected by chance”. Really setting a low bar there. ASA Status, not perfect but better than a coin toss! 230
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 27/07/20253-step guide to mastering #HAVL from @cliffreid.bsky.social 1. Watch the video m.youtube.com/watch?v=aYo7... 2. Read the stepwise guide drive.google.com/file/d/14r_W... 3. Deliberate team practice (rinse & repeat) 156
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 27/07/2025More detailed video tutorial with me & Cliff here… m.youtube.com/watch?v=aYo7... 011
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 24/07/2025If you’re a Billy Joel fan, the doco “And So It Goes” on HBOMax is fantastic. 020
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 23/07/2025Risk of neurological injury w spinal is so rare that even if it were 10 x greater w clopidogrel you’d never power a study to detect it. While it would still be extremely rare, for those affected it’s catastrophic. This pt populatn is often difficult to monitor for early signs of neurol injury. 152
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 23/07/2025There’s many factors at play but are we in any position to weigh them up in a meaningful way to tailor anaesthesia? There’s no clear evidence (I’m aware of) for benefit of GA vs spinal. Haematoma risk of spinal will be higher on clopidogrel but actual risk is impossible to study. 252
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 04/07/2025FB isn't inherently complicated but most people struggle with it bc the basics are badly taught. I'd been practising for decades before someone explained things like this to me... 010
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 01/07/2025For clarity, the same reusable & disposable blades both attach to their respective CMAC & GS workstation & handheld versions. Disposable & reusable HA blades equally good for GS but again I find the CMAC version a bit chunky. New CMAC-PM has a larger centralised screen like the GlideScope GO 2. 130
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 01/07/2025For HAVL (cf Mac) both GlideScope & CMAC are excellent in either workstation (standalone screen) or handheld (integrated screen) versions. CMAC has advantage of a single adult & paed HA blade sizes. Choosing wrong size w GS can complicate Mx. GS reportedly much better local support than Storz. 130
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 01/07/2025#NeuraxialChats 27G should be the default spinal needle. Discuss. 210
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 30/06/2025CMAC reusables are best Mac VL. Basically a standard Mac blade w a camera. Their disposables are weirdly bulky though. 230
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 30/06/2025Due to negative feedback the horizontal flange on the disposable (but not reusable) blades was widened but the vertical flange remains inadequate on both. Comparison w standard Mac blade here… 131
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 30/06/2025Interesting bc it seems like you were insisting on the definition debate fairly recently in this thread 🤷🏻♂️ 100
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 29/06/2025I’m supportive of gentle FMV in RSI but that study was an abomination for many reasons. I know about 20 clinicians w an interest in airway Mx (& widely published in the area) who submitted critical correspondence, NONE of which was published by @nejm.org. Here’s mine. 354
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 28/06/2025More thoughts here… associationofanaesthetists-publications.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/... 020
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 28/06/2025Universal HAVL: 100% grade 1 view & 1st pass success since 2020. 😘👌 6162
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 28/06/2025What is your preferred handheld, all-in-one, videolaryngoscope? 1153
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 28/06/2025The portable versions, GlideScope GO & CMAC-PM, have MUCH larger, higher resolution screens, allow recording & use the same blades as the large versions. They are INFINITELY superior to the McGrath, which is only marginally cheaper when you take into account that its batteries aren’t rechargeable. 142
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 28/06/2025Think we need to be more specific than talking about GlideScope, CMAC & McGrath as the former two have both workstation & handheld versions. While workstation versions w large standalone screens have clear advantages, need to compare handheld versions w McGrath to be comparing apples with apples. 132
Nicholas Chrimes @chrimesy.com · 22/06/2025Yeah I’m going to have a profile pic where I look like John Dutton! Temporarily out of frame, that’s all. 000