Skip to content
  • About
  • Contact
  • Contribute
  • Book
  • Careers
  • Podcast
  • Recommended
  • Speaking
  • All
  • Physician
  • Practice
  • Policy
  • Finance
  • Conditions
  • .edu
  • Patient
  • Meds
  • Tech
  • Social
  • Video
    • All
    • Physician
    • Practice
    • Policy
    • Finance
    • Conditions
    • .edu
    • Patient
    • Meds
    • Tech
    • Social
    • Video
    • About
    • Contact
    • Contribute
    • Book
    • Careers
    • Podcast
    • Recommended
    • Speaking

Why this anesthesiologist has a problem with monitored anesthesia care (MAC)

Stephen Freiberg, MD
Conditions
June 11, 2020
Share
Tweet
Share

I have a major issue with MAC.

To be more specific, I have a major issue with how we communicate the concept of MAC to our patients, anesthesia care team members, and proceduralist colleagues.

MAC stands for “monitored anesthesia care,” and we tend to throw it around and use it interchangeably with a lot of other terms:

  • Sedation
  • Procedural sedation
  • Conscious sedation
  • Twilight anesthesia
  • Light anesthesia

The fact is, these entities are not the same, and I feel pretty strongly that we do a disservice to our patients and our colleagues by not being more specific with our language.

The American Society of Anesthesiologists makes the following important distinction: “Monitored Anesthesia Care (“MAC”) does not describe the continuum of depth of sedation, rather it describes ‘a specific anesthesia service performed by a qualified anesthesia provider, for a diagnostic or therapeutic procedure.’ Indications for monitored anesthesia care include “the need for deeper levels of analgesia and sedation than can be provided by moderate sedation (including potential conversion to a general or regional anesthetic).”

So I argue, in its most technical sense, determining a patient to be appropriate for a MAC anesthetic, tells very little about the depth of sedation they will be under, which frankly, is what most proceduralists and patient’s care about.

Now don’t get me wrong, I’m totally guilty of being busy running four rooms and will say in passing to one of my experienced CRNA colleagues, “sure MAC should be fine for this case.” But I am really pushing myself to be specific in language with my patients and colleagues.  Because individual interpretations of MAC may vary substantially.

Luckily, I don’t need to invent these definitions, because they’ve already been clarified for us by the ASA:

This is the language I strive to use in my preoperative conversations, as well as my discussions with surgeons and colleagues.

As an example, one of the most common anesthetics performed in the country is for endoscopic procedures like colonoscopies. My preop conversation, for a healthy person undergoing screening colonoscopy, will often go something like this:

“The type of anesthesia you will be receiving for this procedure will be monitored anesthesia care with deep sedation. Sometimes folks refer to this as twilight anesthesia. We will put medicine through your IV so you will be asleep for the procedure. You will not be as deeply unconscious as if you were to be under general anesthesia, and therefore you will not need a breathing tube. However, the medicine can affect your blood pressure, heart rate, and breathing, and that’s why we will be there to monitor and support those functions as necessary.”

Most patients are satisfied with this description, and I don’t think it leaves too much ambiguity.

On the flip side, if I’m taking care of an elderly patient with multiple comorbidities (other chronic health problems) who needs a tunneled dialysis catheter, I might tell them, “the type of anesthesia care you will receive is called monitored anesthesia care with minimal sedation. You will receive some medication through your IV to help relax you, but you will likely be aware of what is going on during the procedure. The majority of your comfort will be ensured by the local anesthesia provided by the surgeon.”

I will then tell the surgeon, “Hey, this patient is going to be awake,” and I will inform any other members of the care team model the same.

ADVERTISEMENT

As with many situations in life, appropriate expectation setting can do wonders.

The other big issue I have with MAC is the belief held by patients, largely propagated by non-anesthesia health care professionals, that MAC is safer than general anesthesia.

I’ll never forget, toward the end of my fellowship we were transitioning from performing most of our TAVRs (a minimally invasive approach to replacing the aortic valve, designed for patients “too sick” for open-heart surgery) under general anesthesia, to performing them under MAC, as was the growing national trend. We had an especially sick, morbidly obese patient with severe pulmonary hypertension who we chose to intubate and provide a general anesthetic.  The very talented and senior surgeon was LIVID.  He stormed into the operating room and shouted, “I don’t get it! If this guy is so sick, why would we do general anesthesia?!” I have no doubt he only wanted what was best for the patient, but I also have no doubt he doesn’t understand many of the nuances that go into an anesthesiologist’s decision making.

Similarly, I receive letters from cardiologists all the time saying, “Patient is cleared for MAC anesthesia.” Again, I know their intentions are good, but they don’t actually know.

So is MAC safer than general anesthesia?

The answer is: It depends.

It can be.  But this depends on the depth of sedation required for the procedure, and the other health problems the patient already has.  While general anesthesia undoubtedly has its own risks, establishing general anesthesia from the onset, with a secured airway (breathing tube), can often allow for a more controlled and safer situation than one that might need to be urgently or even emergently adjusted or rescued.

An attending I liked very much during residency must have known the way to my heart was through movie quotes, so he phrased it just like Pat Morita in the 1984 masterpiece The Karate Kid: “Walk right side, safe. Walk left side, safe. Walk middle … sooner or later you get squish like grape.”

That is to say, for very sick patients, you either allow them to be completely awake, or completely asleep (general anesthesia).  Obviously, this is an overly simplistic generalization, but I think the concept is solid; sometimes the most trouble arises in that middle ground along the continuum of sedation.

So bottom line:

If you’re a patient: Trust us. We’re the experts. We want to do what is best for you.

If you’re the proceduralist: Trust us. We’re the experts. We want to do what is best for you.

Stephen Freiberg is an anesthesiologist who blogs at The DADesthesiologist.

Image credit: Shutterstock.com

Prev

Do patients' needs come before the needs of our families?

June 11, 2020 Kevin 2
…
Next

It's time for a comprehensive universal health care system in America

June 11, 2020 Kevin 1
…

Tagged as: Anesthesiology, Surgery

Post navigation

< Previous Post
Do patients' needs come before the needs of our families?
Next Post >
It's time for a comprehensive universal health care system in America

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

More by Stephen Freiberg, MD

  • The time when our health care dollars are worth every penny

    Stephen Freiberg, MD
  • Why this anesthesiologist rarely cancels surgeries

    Stephen Freiberg, MD
  • I’m the best anesthesiologist there is

    Stephen Freiberg, MD

Related Posts

  • How social media can help or hurt your health care career

    Health eCareers
  • Why health care replaced physician care

    Michael Weiss, MD
  • Turn physicians into powerful health care influencers

    Kevin Pho, MD
  • Care is no longer personal. Care is political.

    Eva Kittay, PhD
  • Primary Care First: CMS develops a value-based primary care program for independent practices

    Robert Colton, MD
  • Proactive care is the linchpin for saving America’s health care system

    Ronald A. Paulus, MD, MBA

More in Conditions

  • Why shared decision-making in medicine often fails

    M. Bennet Broner, PhD
  • She wouldn’t move in the womb—then came the rare diagnosis that changed everything

    Amber Robertson
  • Diabetes and Alzheimer’s: What your blood sugar might be doing to your brain

    Marc Arginteanu, MD
  • How motherhood reshaped my identity as a scientist and teacher

    Kathleen Muldoon, PhD
  • Jumpstarting African health care with the beats of innovation

    Princess Benson
  • Voices from the inside: 35 years as a nurse in health care

    Virginia DeFranco, RN
  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • “Think twice, heal once”: Why medical decision-making needs a second opinion from your slower brain (and AI)

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Tech
    • The hidden cost of delaying back surgery

      Gbolahan Okubadejo, MD | Conditions
    • Why a fourth year will not fix emergency medicine’s real problems

      Anna Heffron, MD, PhD & Polly Wiltz, DO | Education
  • Past 6 Months

    • What’s driving medical students away from primary care?

      ​​Vineeth Amba, MPH, Archita Goyal, and Wayne Altman, MD | Education
    • Internal Medicine 2025: inspiration at the annual meeting

      American College of Physicians | Physician
    • Residency as rehearsal: the new pediatric hospitalist fellowship requirement scam

      Anonymous | Physician
    • A faster path to becoming a doctor is possible—here’s how

      Ankit Jain | Education
    • The hidden bias in how we treat chronic pain

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Are quotas a solution to physician shortages?

      Jacob Murphy | Education
  • Recent Posts

    • Why a fourth year will not fix emergency medicine’s real problems

      Anna Heffron, MD, PhD & Polly Wiltz, DO | Education
    • Why shared decision-making in medicine often fails

      M. Bennet Broner, PhD | Conditions
    • Do Jewish students face rising bias in holistic admissions?

      Anonymous | Education
    • She wouldn’t move in the womb—then came the rare diagnosis that changed everything

      Amber Robertson | Conditions
    • Rethinking medical education for a technology-driven era in health care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • From basketball to bedside: Finding connection through March Madness

      Caitlin J. McCarthy, MD | Physician

Subscribe to KevinMD and never miss a story!

Get free updates delivered free to your inbox.


Find jobs at
Careers by KevinMD.com

Search thousands of physician, PA, NP, and CRNA jobs now.

Learn more

View 1 Comments >

Founded in 2004 by Kevin Pho, MD, KevinMD.com is the web’s leading platform where physicians, advanced practitioners, nurses, medical students, and patients share their insight and tell their stories.

Social

  • Like on Facebook
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Connect on Linkedin
  • Subscribe on Youtube
  • Instagram

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Most Popular

  • Past Week

    • The broken health care system doesn’t have to break you

      Jessie Mahoney, MD | Physician
    • How dismantling DEI endangers the future of medical care

      Shashank Madhu and Christian Tallo | Education
    • How scales of justice saved a doctor-patient relationship

      Neil Baum, MD | Physician
    • “Think twice, heal once”: Why medical decision-making needs a second opinion from your slower brain (and AI)

      Harvey Castro, MD, MBA | Tech
    • The hidden cost of delaying back surgery

      Gbolahan Okubadejo, MD | Conditions
    • Why a fourth year will not fix emergency medicine’s real problems

      Anna Heffron, MD, PhD & Polly Wiltz, DO | Education
  • Past 6 Months

    • What’s driving medical students away from primary care?

      ​​Vineeth Amba, MPH, Archita Goyal, and Wayne Altman, MD | Education
    • Internal Medicine 2025: inspiration at the annual meeting

      American College of Physicians | Physician
    • Residency as rehearsal: the new pediatric hospitalist fellowship requirement scam

      Anonymous | Physician
    • A faster path to becoming a doctor is possible—here’s how

      Ankit Jain | Education
    • The hidden bias in how we treat chronic pain

      Richard A. Lawhern, PhD | Meds
    • Are quotas a solution to physician shortages?

      Jacob Murphy | Education
  • Recent Posts

    • Why a fourth year will not fix emergency medicine’s real problems

      Anna Heffron, MD, PhD & Polly Wiltz, DO | Education
    • Why shared decision-making in medicine often fails

      M. Bennet Broner, PhD | Conditions
    • Do Jewish students face rising bias in holistic admissions?

      Anonymous | Education
    • She wouldn’t move in the womb—then came the rare diagnosis that changed everything

      Amber Robertson | Conditions
    • Rethinking medical education for a technology-driven era in health care [PODCAST]

      The Podcast by KevinMD | Podcast
    • From basketball to bedside: Finding connection through March Madness

      Caitlin J. McCarthy, MD | Physician

MedPage Today Professional

An Everyday Health Property Medpage Today
  • Terms of Use | Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • DMCA Policy
All Content © KevinMD, LLC
Site by Outthink Group

Why this anesthesiologist has a problem with monitored anesthesia care (MAC)
1 comments

Comments are moderated before they are published. Please read the comment policy.

Loading Comments...