Fields · British journal of anaesthesia 2018 · matched case-control study · n=1020 (510 cases, 510 controls)

Agitation in adults in the post-anaesthesia care unit after general anaesthesia.

Cited 151 times in the scientific literature.

Level 4 - case-series / case-control

Matched case-control study

PubMed 30336849 · doi:10.1016/j.bja.2018.07.017 · record verified 2026-08-29

What was done

A 1:1 matched case-control study identified adult patients experiencing agitation (defined as Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score +3 or +4, or administration of haloperidol) in the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) after general anaesthesia between July 2010 and September 2016. Cases were matched to controls by age, sex, and surgical procedure. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate associated patient and procedural factors.

What was found

Agitation occurred in 510 patients, an incidence of 2.5 cases per 1,000 patients (95% CI: 2.3–2.7). Factors independently associated with agitation were: - Postoperative tracheal tube (OR: 16.6; 95% CI: 7.25–38.2; P<0.001) - Urinary catheter (OR: 7.25; 95% CI: 4.31–12.2; P<0.001) - Substance misuse (OR: 6.77; 95% CI: 1.23–37.2; P=0.03) - Cognitive impairment (OR: 4.66; 95% CI: 1.79–12.1; P=0.002) - Nasogastric tube (OR: 4.06; 95% CI: 1.51–10.9; P=0.006) - Chest tube (OR: 3.46; 95% CI: 1.07–11.2; P=0.006) - Obesity (OR: 2.49; 95% CI: 1.66–3.73; P<0.001) - Psychiatric problems (OR: 2.05; 95% CI: 1.32–3.19; P=0.002) - Fall risk (OR: 1.66; 95% CI: 1.02–2.70; P=0.04) Agitated patients had higher rates of postoperative delirium (16.1% vs 6.3%; P<0.001) and pulmonary complications (9.8% vs 4.7%; P=0.002) than matched controls.

Why it matters

Recognizing that invasive postoperative devices and underlying mental health vulnerabilities are linked to emergence agitation can guide targeted PACU staffing and resource allocation to prevent harm.

Limits

The case-control design precludes causal inference. Defining cases in part by haloperidol administration may introduce treatment-selection bias. Several confidence intervals (e.g., substance misuse, tracheal tube) were wide, indicating imprecision. Specific anaesthetic agents and pain levels were not reported in the abstract.

Cited by