━━1=> The output effect you're trying to eliminate/reduce is pain and swelling in respiratory tract.
┗━━2=> Hypothesis (needs testing): This is caused by physical irritation of the tube
┗━━3=> Hypothesis (needs testing): That irritation is caused by A) friction and B) physical pressure
┣━━4a=> How can we reduce friction?
┃ ┗━━5a=> Would a lubricant on the tube meet engineering constraints and reduce friction?
┃ ┗━━6a=> Would the use of lubricant in practice create added risks or difficulties in the operating room?
┃ ┗━━7a=> Hypothesis: Yes, due to the application of lubricant necessitating a glove-change afterwards.
┃ ┗━━8a=> How can we overcome problems with lubricant application to the intubation tube?
┃ ┗━━9a=> Would passing the intubation tube through a no-mess, easy-to-use "self lubricating ring" mitigate added risks or difficulties in the operating room?
┗━━4b=> How can we reduce physical pressure?
┗━━5b=> Would reducing the diameter meet engineering constraints and reduce pressure?
┗━━6b=> If there is a minimum diameter requirement needed to deliver oxygen, would dynamically changing the diameter of the tube (e.g. inflating it) after insertion create a reduction in pressure?
So that's a very simplified example of how to solve problems with systems thinking (although in reality it would be WAY more detailed and actually test each hypothesis).The problem is very rarely "money" in medical fields, the problem is someone actually identifying the root problem/s, i.e. the "problem behind the problem behind the problem", and applying engineering to solve that, which solves the problem one level above it, etc.
If you're interested in this, read up on things like "the five whys", a systems approach to problem solving invented at Toyota.
Thanks for presenting this in this format, it helped me visualize how this process would work.
We use the five whys at work to great effect, to such an extent I actually look forward to COEs.
Your comment put a name to this domain. I'd like to learn more about systems thinking. Are there any books you recommend?
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3828902-thinking-in-syst...
I've read it a few months ago with high expectations, pen in hand, but… I didn't really make many notes.
Sure, if you've never heard about feedback loops (and that there is positive and negative feedback), but, is the book just way too basic for me or did I miss the point?
Is Weinberg's book maybe more practical or more advanced?
I'm still thinking that systems thinking has much to offer (and skimming the International Encyclopedia of Systems and Cybernetics confirms that hunch), but where do I continue?
It is possible that because my procedure ran longer than expected due to complications, they either had to reinsert a different tube or the tube they used was not designed to be used for that long.
I had my gallbladder removed and unfortunately some of the gallstones got stuck in the bile ducts and they had to chase them down. This turned a 45 minute procedure into a 3 1/2 hour operation and once finished it took another 2 hours to wake up.
So this may not be entirely about the physical contact of the tube.
I am not a doctor, just someone who has seen too many of them over the years for my own medical dramas.
Edit: Just to be crystal clear, I am absolutely not trying to suggest anything for you, medically speaking. The above observations are food for thought concerning the problem space under discussion. That's it. That's all it is.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21825776/?dopt=Abstract
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11001049/?dopt=Abstract
I don't think inflating would work, since it's a tube. Maybe you could achieve the same thing with a sort of skeleton inside the tube that can push it to different widths.
I wouldn’t know whether that would help, though. I think it’s at least equally likely the problems are caused by having to make fairly tight turns in a tunnel that changes shape all the time.
2. To improve a system, first determine what is constraining the performance of the system. This is 80/20 thinking and attempting to optimize globally instead of locally. Local improvement may not result in system improvement.
Longer explanation and examples follow.
1: The 5 whys are a great problem solving tool. Often there are many potential root causes which need to be investigated. Sometimes there is a single root cause that is responsible for the problem being investigated other times there are multiple factors that interact to cause the problem.
An Ishikawa or “fishbone” diagram is a useful tool to help organize many potential root causes.
In the example of pain and swelling caused by intubation we could start a little higher before diving into detailed 5 whys.
We can start with top level groups, such as: - material - method - person - patient
For each group, we determine potential root causes. This can be done through asking the experts performing the process, reviewing SOPs, observing the process, looking at process parameters, literature reviews.
Some examples, material could be the material of the tube, the type of coating being used, anesthesia, etc.
Method could be how the tube is inserted.
Person can be if the person is new to the process or experienced, is the person following procedures...
Patient could be if the patient has any allergies to materials or adverse reactions to medication or anesthetic...
The above are illustrative. You can decompose the groups in different ways. You can define the groups differently. Of course the above isn’t comprehensive or unique. Try to be MECE or mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive when decomposing the problem space.
We often try to investigate the potential root causes by performing statistical experiments to try and determine cause and effect and which variables significantly impact the outcome.
2: I want to provide an alternative point of systems thinking. The medical procedure is a process. There is a system at work to deliver that medical procedure. There are measurements to determine how the procedure is working. Efficiency (are you using the resources planned) and effectiveness (are you achieving the outcome the procedure was designed to provide) are two high-level ways to look at measuring system performance. Many measurements can be derived from these two.
From that perspective, you want to focus improvement on the areas/steps in the process that will most improve the outcome measures. With that in mind, it may have been determined that the combination of intubation materials and procedures that are used provide for the best outcomes as determined by the procedure provider. It may be to reduce cost while keeping recovery, discomfort, risk of infection, etc. at some baseline acceptable level. If you change those variables to reduce discomfort, it’s possible you may negatively impact cost, patient recover, or something else.
Note: I’m not a health care professional, so I have no knowledge about medical procedures or the various trade-offs and optimizations that take place. I am speaking from the point of view of someone who works in quality and process improvement.
Perhaps a more "low hanging fruit" solution for this problem space would be better procedures for helping people recover.
Doctors routinely prescribe antibiotics. I never had any of them tell me to eat yogurt afterwards to repair what they do to your gut biome. I learned that elsewhere.
No doctor ever told me I needed to taper off of steroids. I learned that from a friend.
There are a lot of ways modern follow-up care for medicine seems to be pretty bad and this is probably a much easier thing to improve upon than innovating on intubation tubes (which I'm not trying to discourage -- I see no reason we can't do both).
So whatever they are supposed to do, that's not what I personally experienced.
Again that’s terrible practice but more often than not, given the prevelance of Benzo knowledge and specific requests from patients, some people end up giving them away (similarly to antibiotics for viral infections). It’s bad medicine but when GPs have 20 minutes for a consult and patients are more and more demanding... corners are cut when harm is considered minimal (ie regular low level Benzo dosing).
For example, probably 20-30% of elderly patients in hospital are on temazepam on arrival. They’re taking 10mg every night. That should never happen, but it does all the time.
Finally, there is emerging data that prolonged tapering may actually worsen outcomes, such as in certain post operative settings.
So, please don't assume the doctor is always right. Do your due diligence. They are fallible just like us, to be honest, I think they are just engineers working on the human body.
My mom went through this when she was having health issues over a few years before her passing. I think it varies based on how good the person performing the intubation is and how long it is in.
The first time her voice ended up like minnie mouse, and it was like that for a long, long time. Probably a year before it became "normal", but definitely not like how she used to sound. It kept slowly getting better.
A few years later her voice was mostly back to how she sounded before hand and had been for while, then she had more health issues and was intubated again. This time she was fine - no voice change and no pain that she reported. A few months later, intubation, but this time her voice was pretty bad and it never got better before her passing.
You say you "just" had surgery- you probably still have a lot of inflammation on your palatine tonsils and vocal fold area, making your throat scratchy. It should go back to normal in a few days.
It's not really the "tube" that hurts- what hurts is the removal. While it's in during surgery your anatomy gets used to the tube there and kind of all settles in place around it, getting comfy. When it's pulled out, it feels like it's being ripped out and it's kind of a shock to your system. Imagine if you hiked the Appalachian Trail for a few months and never changed your boots or your socks and the skin kind of melded into the socks and then at the end of your hike I quickly whipped your socks off. Your throat right now is like how your feet would feel.
The thing with the tubes is they have to be rigid enough to stand up to the insertion which while a delicate process actually takes more force than you'd think so they need to have a pretty solid structure and also can't collapse on themselves while keeping the airway open. There's a lot of "stuff" that can come up in the tube or goes down through them - phlegm, sticky sputum, tonsil stones, "gunk," blood, lasers, cutting tools, biopsy tissue, etc. Can't have risk of the tube having divets or anything where something could get caught on or stuck to and block the airway. They also will have plastic and metal suction tubes and cameras and things inserted down inside the tube, so the sometimes the width of the tube depends on the procedure they're doing and what how big it is based on the things going through it.
I'm not a doctor, just a former respiratory therapist but I'd recommend taking ibuprofen and if it's still bothering your sending a message or calling your doctor tomorrow for their input.
As far as making a more comfortable tube - they already use water and gel based lubrication to make the insertion and extubation process more comfortable on the airway. Your idea of a lab-grown natural membrane is interesting, but imo too much medical liability around having the tube be comfortable- would way rather have the patient have a stable airway and uncomfortable throat for a week than the airway collapse mid procedure and have brain damage or worse from an occluded airway.
Maybe a longer lasting lubricant so it could last through and still be lubed up for the extubation, however maybe they don't do that because of risk of it dripping down the tube into the lungs. Generally anything fluid in the lungs is bad and that's why your cilia along your bronchioles bring up all that gunk we cough up on a daily basis.
Anyways- hope you feel better soon! Fwiw, pain on extubation was a very common complaint- it's one of the reasons patients who frequently or need long term ventilation will have a temporary or permanent tracheostomy which goes in through the throat directly and skips the delicate tissue around the vocal anatomy.
Edit- here are two good papers I found googling about this that you might want to read for more info:
Larger review of 9 studies/775 pts: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7219530/
Voice loss following intubation: https://www.arwy.org/article.asp?issn=2665-9425;year=2019;vo... <-- what I found interesting from this one is it references between 5-90% of patients have some postop symptoms! Oof.
> The incidence of laryngopharyngeal symptoms after endotracheal intubation varies between 5.7% and 90%. These are usually mild and transient requiring minimal active intervention or none at all. Most resolve in 12-72 h, with an exception in cases of injury to vocal folds or arytenoids.[2]
First time back in Russia when I broke my arm badly and they had to reassemble it from tiny pieces and second one in Australia recently.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlFnPAydJgk
If doctors and hospitals could adopt some simple best practices around central lines, a huge amount of lives would be saved. And yet it hasn't happened.
If doctors won't change to stop preventable deaths, they certainly won't change to prevent some discomfort.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laryngoscopy#/media/File:Macin...
I find it hard to believe that pain isn't a well studied area of medicine. But to answer your question, we already do know how to "modify/intercept nerve signals", they're called painkillers.
The point is that more effort isn't likely to dramatically change things on the margin. Whether we know much about pain in an absolute sense is really quite orthogonal to the question.
Citation needed; I think is completely possible to modify nerve communication in real time and its within our reach but the resources to do all the research and experiments just aren't there; the causes with the big bucks are things like cancer research (nothing worng with that, just pointing it out); plus many artificial obstacles to make lab-grown nerves such as religious organizations against stem cell research.
Pain is something where acupuncture and other related methods might be better.
For acute pain such as the OPs experience, painkillers are/should be first line when treatment is indicated.
There are two broad types used for general anaesthesia - the endotracheal tube and the laryngeal masked airway, which are very different in design and function.