Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Guidelines and Hospital Length of Stay, Readmission, Complications, and Mortality: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: A comprehensive review of the evidence exploring the outcomes of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines has not been completed. Objective: To evaluate if ERAS guidelines are associated with improved hospital length of stay, hospital readmission, complications, and mortality compared with usual surgical care, and to understand differences in estimates based on study and patient factors. Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane Central were searched from inception until June 2021. Study Selection: Titles, abstracts, and full-text articles were screened by 2 independent reviewers. Eligible studies were randomized clinical trials that examined ERAS-guided surgery compared with a control group and reported on at least 1 of the outcomes. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Data were abstracted in duplicate using a standardized data abstraction form. The study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Risk of bias was assessed in duplicate using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates for each outcome, and meta-regression identified sources of heterogeneity within each outcome. Main Outcome and Measures: The primary outcomes were hospital length of stay, hospital readmission within 30 days of index discharge, 30-day postoperative complications, and 30-day postoperative mortality. Results: Of the 12 047 references identified, 1493 full texts were screened for eligibility, 495 were included in the systematic review, and 74 RCTs with 9076 participants were included in the meta-analysis. Included studies presented data from 21 countries and 9 ERAS-guided surgical procedures with 15 (20.3%) having a low risk of bias. The mean (SD) Reporting on ERAS Compliance, Outcomes, and Elements Research checklist score was 13.5 (2.3). Hospital length of stay decreased by 1.88 days (95% CI, 0.95-2.81 days; I2 = 86.5%; P < .001) and the risk of complications decreased (risk ratio, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.59-0.87; I2 = 78.6%; P < .001) in the ERAS group. Risk of readmission and mortality were not significant. Conclusions and Relevance: In this meta-analysis, ERAS guidelines were associated with decreased hospital length of stay and complications. Future studies should aim to improve implementation of ERAS and increase the reach of the guidelines.

Multiphasic exercise prehabilitation for patients undergoing surgery for head and neck cancer: a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study protocol.

Head and neck cancer (HNC) treatment often consists of major surgery followed by adjuvant therapy, which can result in treatment-related side effects, decreased physical function, and diminished quality of life. Perioperative nutrition interventions and early mobilization improve recovery after HNC treatment. However, there are few studies on prehabilitation that include exercise within the HNC surgical care pathway. We have designed a multiphasic exercise prehabilitation intervention for HNC patients undergoing surgical resection with free flap reconstruction. We will use a hybrid effectiveness-implementation study design guided by the RE-AIM framework to address the following objectives: (1) to evaluate intervention benefits through physical function and patient-reported outcome assessments; (2) to determine the safety and feasibility of the prehabilitation intervention; (3) to evaluate the implementation of exercise within the HNC surgical care pathway; and (4) to establish a post-operative screening and referral pathway to exercise oncology resources. The results of this study will provide evidence for the benefits and costs of a multiphasic exercise prehabilitation intervention embedded within the HNC surgical care pathway. This paper describes the study protocol design, multiphasic exercise prehabilitation intervention, planned analyses, and dissemination of findings. Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/NCT04598087.

The impact of delayed nonurgent surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic on surgeons in Alberta: a qualitative interview study.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, nonurgent surgeries were delayed to preserve capacity for patients admitted with COVID-19; surgeons were challenged personally and professionally during this time. We aimed to describe the impact of delays to nonurgent surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic from the surgeons' perspective in Alberta. METHODS: We conducted an interpretive description qualitative study in Alberta from January to March 2022. We recruited adult and pediatric surgeons via social media and through personal contacts from our research network. Semistructured interviews were conducted via Zoom, and we analyzed the data via inductive thematic analysis to identify relevant themes and subthemes related to the impact of delaying nonurgent surgery on surgeons and their provision of surgical care. RESULTS: We conducted 12 interviews with 9 adult surgeons and 3 pediatric surgeons. Six themes were identified: accelerator for a surgical care crisis, health system inequity, system-level management of disruptions in surgical services, professional and interprofessional impact, personal impact, and pragmatic adaptation to health system strain. Participants also identified strategies to mitigate the challenges experienced due to nonurgent surgical delays during the COVID-19 pandemic (i.e., additional operating time, surgical process reviews to reduce inefficiencies, and advocacy for sustained funding of hospital beds, human resources and community-based postoperative care). INTERPRETATION: Our study describes the impacts and challenges experienced by adult and pediatric surgeons of delayed nonurgent surgeries because of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Surgeons identified potential health system-, hospital- and physician-level strategies to minimize future impacts on patients from delays of nonurgent surgery.

Preoperative hemoglobin and perioperative blood transfusion in major head and neck surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is a growing concern with inappropriate, excessive perioperative blood transfusions. Understanding the influence of low preoperative hemoglobin (Hgb) on perioperative blood transfusion (PBT) in head and neck cancer (HNC) surgery with free flap reconstruction may help guide clinical practice to reduce inappropriate treatment among these patients. The objective is to synthesize evidence regarding the association between preoperative Hgb and PBT among major HNC free flap surgeries. METHODS: Terms and synonyms for HNC surgical procedures, Hgb and PBT were used to search MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Reviews from inception to February 2020. Reference lists of included full texts and studies reporting the preoperative Hgb, anemia or hematocrit (exposure) and the PBT (outcome) in major HNC surgery with free flap reconstruction were eligible. Studies examining esophageal, thyroid and parathyroid neoplasms were excluded; as were case reports, case series (n < 20), editorials, reviews, perspectives, viewpoints and responses. Two independent, blinded reviewers screened titles, abstracts and full texts in duplicate. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was followed. A random-effects model was used to pool reported data. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had a PBT. Subgroup analysis examined sources of heterogeneity for perioperative predictors of PBT (age, sex, flap type, flap site and preoperative Hgb). We also examined mean preoperative Hgb in the PBT and no PBT groups. RESULTS: Patients with low preoperative Hgb were transfused more than those with normal Hgb (47.62%, 95% CI = 41.19-54.06, I2 = 0.00% and 13.92%, 95% CI = 10.19-17.65, I2 = 20.69%, respectively). None of the predictor variables explained PBT. The overall pooled mean preoperative Hgb was 12.96 g/dL (95% CI = 11.33-14.59, I2 = 0.00%) and was 13.58 g/dL (95% CI = 11.95-15.21, I2 = 0.00%) in the no PBT group and 12.05 g/dL (95% CI = 10.01 to 14.09, I2 = 0.00%) in the PBT group. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity between studies, especially around the trigger for PBT, highlights the need for additional research to guide clinical practice of preoperative Hgb related to PBT to enhance patient outcomes and improve healthcare stewardship.

The impact of delaying surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic in Alberta: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic overwhelmed health care systems, leading many jurisdictions to reduce surgeries to create capacity (beds and staff) to care for the surge of patients with COVID-19; little is known about the impact of this on patients whose surgery was delayed. The objective of this study was to understand the patient and family/caregiver perspective of having a surgery delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Using an interpretative descriptive approach, we conducted interviews between Sept. 20 and Oct. 8, 2021. Adult patients who had their surgery delayed or cancelled during the COVID-19 pandemic in Alberta, Canada, and their family/caregivers were eligible to participate. Trained interviewers conducted semistructured interviews, which were iteratively analyzed by 2 independent reviewers using an inductive approach to thematic content analysis. RESULTS: We conducted 16 interviews with 15 patients and 1 family member/caregiver, ranging from 27 to 75 years of age, with a variety of surgical procedures delayed. We identified 4 interconnected themes: individual-level impacts on physical and mental health, family and friends, work and quality of life; system-level factors related to health care resources, communication and perceived accountability within the system; unique issues related to COVID-19 (maintaining health and isolation); and uncertainty about health and timing of surgery. INTERPRETATION: Although the decision to delay nonurgent surgeries was made to manage the strain on health care systems, our study illustrates the consequences of these decisions, which were diffuse and consequential. The findings of this study highlight the need to develop and adopt strategies to mitigate the burden of waiting for surgery during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Outcomes and Healthcare Utilization Among New Persistent Opioid Users and Nonopioid Users After Curative-intent Surgery for Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to compare the health outcomes and resource use of cancer patients who were new persistent opioid users with those who were not, after undergoing curative intent surgery for cancer. BACKGROUND: Little is known about long-term health outcomes (overdose, mortality) and resource utilization of new persistent opioid users among cancer patients undergoing curative-intent surgery. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all adults with a diagnosis of solid cancers who underwent curative-intent surgery during the study period (2011-2015) in Alberta, Canada and were opioid-naïve before surgery, with a follow-up period until December 31, 2019. The key exposure, "new persistent opioid user," was defined as a patient who was opioid-naive before surgery and subsequently filled at least 1 opioid prescription between 60 and 180 days after surgery. The primary outcome was opioid overdose that occurred within 3 years of surgery. All-cause death, noncancer caused death, and department visit (yes vs. no), and hospitalization (yes vs. no) in the follow-up periods were also included as outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 19,219 patients underwent curative intent surgery with a median follow-up of 47 months, of whom 1530 (8.0%) were identified as postoperative new persistent opioid users. In total, 101 (0.5%) patients experienced opioid overdose within 3 years of surgery. Compared with nonopioid users, new persistent opioid users experienced a higher rate of opioid overdose (OR = 2.37, 95% CI: 1.44-3.9) within 3 years of surgery. New persistent opioid use was also associated with a greater likelihood of being hospitalized (OR = 2.03, 95% CI: 1.76-2.33) and visiting an emergency room (OR = 1.83, 95% CI: 1.62-2.06) in the first year after surgery, and a higher overall (HR = 1.28, 95% CI: 1.1-1.49) and noncancer caused mortality (HR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.12-1.58), when compared with nonopioid users. CONCLUSION: Postoperative new persistent opioid use among cancer patients undergoing curative-intent surgery is associated with subsequent opioid overdose, worse survival, and more health resource utilization.

Delivery and Prioritization of Surgical Care in Canada During COVID-19: An Environmental Scan.

BACKGROUND: During COVID-19 healthcare systems had to make concessions to make room for the surge of COVID-19 patients requiring hospital and intensive care. Postponing surgeries was a common strategy; however, it is unclear how surgical care was delivered during this time of constraint. The objective of this study was to understand how surgical care was delivered and prioritized during the COVID-19 pandemic response. METHODS: This was an environmental scan following the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health methodology. This study was conducted in Canada; a universal, publicly funded healthcare system. Evidence sources on policies pertaining to the provision of surgical care between January 2020 and October 2022 were obtained from ministries of health, health services agencies and publicly funded hospitals across all 10 provinces and three territories. We synthesized the evidence sources using framework analysis. RESULTS: We identified 205 evidence sources that described six themes about the provision of surgical care during the COVID-19 pandemic: the cycle of postponement and resumption; guidelines for triaging and prioritizing surgical cases; Infection Prevention and Control (IPAC), and safety measures for surgical care during COVID-19, patient-centred care, and looking forward (recovery planning, leadership, and decision-making). CONCLUSION: This study provides a comprehensive understanding of how surgical care was disrupted and innovated during COVID-19 which can inform future strategies for providing effective and efficient surgical care during times of healthcare constraint.

Impact of Family Presence on Delirium in Critically Ill Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of family presence on the prevalence and duration of delirium in adults admitted to an ICU. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Medical-surgical ICUs in Alberta, AB, Canada. PATIENTS: A population of 25,537 unique patients admitted at least once to an Alberta ICU. METHODS: We obtained electronic health records of consecutive adults (≥ 18 yr) admitted to one of 14 medical-surgical ICU in Alberta, Canada, from January 1, 2014, to December 30, 2018. Family presence was quantified using a validated algorithm and categorized as: 1) physical presence in ICU, 2) telephone call only, and 3) no presence (reference group). Delirium was measured using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist (ICDSC) and defined as an ICDSC greater than or equal to 4. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic and linear regression were used to evaluate the association between family presence and prevalence (binary) and duration (d) of delirium, respectively. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The association between family presence and delirium prevalence differed according to admission type and admission Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). Among medical and emergency surgical patients irrespective of admission GCS, physical presence of family was not significantly associated with the prevalence of delirium. In elective surgical patients, physical presence of family was associated with decreased prevalence of delirium in patients with intact Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS = 15; adjusted odds ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.39-0.97; p = 0.02). Physical presence of family (adjusted mean difference [AMD] -1.87 d; 95% CI, -2.01 to -1.81; p < 0.001) and telephone calls (AMD -1.41 d; 95% CI, -1.52 to -1.31; p < 0.001) were associated with decreased duration of delirium in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of family presence on delirium are complex and dependent on type of visitation, reason for ICU admission, and brain function on ICU admission.

A Multiple Baseline Trial of an Electronic ICU Discharge Summary Tool for Improving Quality of Care.

OBJECTIVE: Effective communication between clinicians is essential for seamless discharge of patients between care settings. Yet, discharge summaries are commonly not available and incomplete. We implemented and evaluated a structured electronic health record-embedded electronic discharge (eDischarge) summary tool for patients discharged from the ICU to a hospital ward. DESIGN: Multiple baseline trial with randomized and staggered implementation. SETTING: Adult medical-surgical ICUs at four acute care hospitals serving a single Canadian city. PATIENTS: Health records of patients 18 years old or older, in the ICU 24 hours or longer, and discharged from the ICU to an in-hospital patient ward between February 12, 2018, and June 30, 2019. INTERVENTION: A structured electronic note (ICU eDischarge tool) with predefined fields (e.g., diagnosis) embedded in the hospital-wide electronic health information system. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We compared the percent of timely (available at discharge) and complete (included goals of care designation, diagnosis, list of active issues, active medications) discharge summaries pre and post implementation using mixed effects logistic regression models. After implementing the ICU eDischarge tool, there was an immediate and sustained increase in the proportion of patients discharged from ICU with timely and complete discharge summaries from 10.8% (preimplementation period) to 71.1% (postimplementation period) (adjusted odds ratio, 32.43; 95% CI, 18.22-57.73). No significant changes were observed in rapid response activation, cardiopulmonary arrest, death in hospital, ICU readmission, and hospital length of stay following ICU discharge. Preventable (60.1 vs 5.7 per 1,000 d; p = 0.023), but not nonpreventable (27.3 vs 40.2 per 1,000d; p = 0.54), adverse events decreased post implementation. Clinicians perceived the eDischarge tool to produce a higher quality discharge process. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an electronic tool was associated with more timely and complete discharge summaries for patients discharged from the ICU to a hospital ward.

Survey of Investigators About Sharing Human Research Data in the Neurosciences.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In the neurosciences, significant opportunities for sharing individual-level data are underexploited. Commentators suggest various barriers to data sharing, which may need to be addressed. Investigators' perspectives on the main barriers are unclear. Furthermore, bioethicists have raised concerns about the potential misuse of neuroscience data, although discussions are hampered by uncertainty about the potential risks. It is unclear how common sensitive data are obtained and whether investigators judge them as sensitive. METHODS: An online survey was disseminated among 1,190 principal investigators (PIs) of active National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, National Institute of Mental Health, or NIH Brain Research Through Advancing Innovative Neurotechnologies Initiative grants involving human subject research. RESULTS: A total of 397 investigators responded to the survey (response rate 33%). Most investigators (84%) support efforts to increase sharing of deidentified individual-level data. However, investigators perceive many barriers to data sharing. The largest barriers were costs and time; limited interpretation of the data without understanding the context of data collection; lack of incentives; limited standardization and norms for data acquisition, formatting, and description; and heterogeneity of data types. Several types of data described as sensitive in the literature are common among neuroscience studies, for example, neural correlates of behavior, emotions, or decision making (71%) and/or predictive data (54%). Although most investigators consider it unlikely or extremely unlikely for their research data to be misused to harm individual research participants (82%), the majority were at least slightly concerned about potential harm to individuals if their research data were misused (65%). Investigators with more easily reidentifiable data, data from vulnerable groups, and neural data were more concerned about the likelihood of misuse and/or magnitude of harm of misuse of their research data. DISCUSSION: We hope these data help prioritize the development of tools and strategies to overcome the main barriers to data sharing. Furthermore, these data provide input on what may be sensitive data for which additional safeguards should be considered.

Validated algorithms for identifying timing of second event of oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma using real-world data.

BACKGROUND: Understanding occurrence and timing of second events (recurrence and second primary cancer) is essential for cancer specific survival analysis. However, this information is not readily available in administrative data. METHODS: Alberta Cancer Registry, physician claims, and other administrative data were used. Timing of second event was estimated based on our developed algorithm. For validation, the difference, in days between the algorithm estimated and the chart-reviewed timing of second event. Further, the result of Cox-regression modeling cancer-free survival was compared to chart review data. RESULTS: Majority (74.3%) of the patients had a difference between the chart-reviewed and algorithm-estimated timing of second event falling within the 0-60 days window. Kaplan-Meier curves generated from the estimated data and chart review data were comparable with a 5-year second-event-free survival rate of 75.4% versus 72.5%. CONCLUSION: The algorithm provided an estimated timing of second event similar to that of the chart review.

"It affects every aspect of your life": A qualitative study of the impact of delaying surgery during COVID-19

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has overwhelmed healthcare systems, leading many jurisdictions to reduce surgical services to create capacity (beds and staff) to care for the surge of patients with COVID-19. These decisions were made in haste, and little is known about the impact on patients whose surgery was delayed. This study explores the impact of delaying non-urgent surgeries on patients, from their perspective. MethodsUsing an interpretative description approach, we conducted interviews with adult patients and their caregivers who had their surgery delayed or cancelled during the COVID-19 pandemic in Alberta, Canada. Trained interviewers conducted semi-structured interviews. Interviews were iteratively analyzed by two independent reviewers using an inductive approach to thematic content analysis to understand key elements of the patient experience. ResultsWe conducted 16 interviews with participants ranging from 27 to 75 years of age with a variety of surgical procedures delayed. We identified four interconnected themes: individual-level impacts (physical health, mental health, family and friends, work, quality of life), system-level factors (healthcare resources, communication, perceived accountability/responsibility), unique issues related to COVID-19, and uncertainty. InterpretationThe patient-reported impact of having a surgery delayed during the COVID-19 pandemic was diffuse and consequential. While the decision to delay non-urgent surgeries was made to manage the strain on healthcare systems, our study illustrates the consequences of these decisions. We advocate for the development and adoption of strategies to mitigate the burden of distress that waiting for surgery during and after COVID-19 has on patients and their family/caregivers.

The role of hospital characteristics in patient safety: a protocol for a national cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Substantial expenditures on health care safety programs have been justified by their goal of reducing health care associated-harm (adverse events), but adverse event rates have not changed over the past 4 decades. The objective of this study is to describe hospital-level factors that are relevant to safety in Canadian hospitals and the impact of these factors on hospital adverse events. METHODS: This is a protocol for a national cohort study to describe the association between hospital-level factors and adverse events. We will survey at least 90 (35%) Canadian hospitals to describe 4 safety-relevant domains, chosen based on the literature and expert consultation, namely patient safety culture, safety strategies, staffing, and volume and capacity. We will retrospectively identify hospital adverse events from a national data source. We will evaluate organization-level factors using established scales and a survey, codesigned by the study team and hospital leaders. Hospital leaders, clinical unit leaders and front-line staff will complete the surveys once a year for 3 years, with an anticipated start date of winter 2022. We will use national health administrative data to estimate the rate and type of hospital adverse events corresponding to each 1-year survey period. INTERPRETATION: Analysis of data from this project will describe hospital organizational factors that are relevant to safety and help identify organizational initiatives that improve hospital patient safety. In addition to biyearly reports to the leaders of the participating hospitals, we have a multifaceted and tailored dissemination strategy that includes integrating the knowledge users into the study team to increase the likelihood that our study will lead to improved hospital patient safety.

Evolving Factors in Hospital Safety: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Hospital Adverse Events.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to estimate the frequency of hospital adverse events (AEs) and explore the rate of AEs over time, and across and within hospital populations. METHODS: Validated search terms were run in MEDLINE and EMBASE; gray literature and references of included studies were also searched. Studies of any design or language providing an estimate of AEs within the hospital were eligible. Studies were excluded if they only provided an estimate for a specific AE, a subgroup of hospital patients or children. Data were abstracted in duplicate using a standardized data abstraction form. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis estimated the occurrence of hospital AEs, and meta-regression explored the association between hospital AEs, and patient and hospital characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 45,426 unique references were identified; 1,265 full-texts were reviewed and 94 studies representing 590 million admissions from 25 countries from 1961 to 2014 were included. The incidence of hospital AEs was 8.6 per 100 patient admissions (95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3 to 8.9; I2 = 100%, P < 0.001). Half of the AEs were preventable (52.6%), and a third resulted in moderate/significant harm (39.7%). The most evaluated AEs were surgical AEs, drug-related AEs, and nosocomial infections. The occurrence of AEs increased by year (95% CI, -0.05 to -0.04; P < 0.001) and patient age (95% CI = -0.15 to -0.14; P < 0.001), and varied by country income level and study characteristics. Patient sex, hospital type, hospital service, and geographical location were not associated with AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital AEs are common, and reported rates are increasing in the literature. Given the increase in AEs over time, hospitals should reinvest in improving hospital safety with a focus on interventions targeted toward the more than half of AEs that are preventable.

From Pathways to Practice: Impact of Implementing Mobilization Recommendations in Head and Neck Cancer Surgery with Free Flap Reconstruction.

One of the foundational elements of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guidelines is early postoperative mobilization. For patients undergoing head and neck cancer (HNC) surgery with free flap reconstruction, the ERAS guideline recommends patients be mobilized within 24 h postoperatively. The objective of this study was to evaluate compliance with the ERAS recommendation for early postoperative mobilization in 445 consecutive patients who underwent HNC surgery in the Calgary Head and Neck Enhanced Recovery Program. This retrospective analysis found that recommendation compliance increased by 10% despite a more aggressive target for mobilization (from 48 to 24 h). This resulted in a decrease in postoperative mobilization time and a stark increase in the proportion of patients mobilized within 24 h (from 10% to 64%). There was a significant relationship between compliance with recommended care and time to postoperative mobilization (Spearman's rho = -0.80; p < 0.001). Hospital length of stay was reduced by a median of 2 days, from 12 (1QR = 9-16) to 10 (1QR = 8-14) days (z = 3.82; p < 0.001) in patients who received guideline-concordant care. Engaging the clinical team and changing the order set to support clinical decision-making resulted in increased adherence to guideline-recommended care for patients undergoing major HNC surgery with free flap reconstruction.

Impact of Early Mobilization on Recovery after Major Head and Neck Surgery with Free Flap Reconstruction.

Surgery with free flap reconstruction is a standard treatment for head and neck cancer (HNC). Because of the complexity of HNC surgery, recovery can be challenging, and complications are common. One of the foundations of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is early postoperative mobilization. The ERAS guidelines for HNC surgery with free flap reconstruction recommend mobilization within 24 h. This is based mainly on evidence from other surgical disciplines, and the extent to which mobilization within 24 h improves recovery after HNC surgery has not been explored. This retrospective analysis included 445 patients from the Calgary Head and Neck Enhanced Recovery Program. Mobilization after 24 h was associated with more complications of any type (OR = 1.73, 95% CI [confidence interval] = 1.16-2.57) and more major complications (OR = 1.76; 95% CI = 1.00-3.16). When accounting for patient and clinical factors, mobilization after 48 h was a significant predictor of major complications (OR = 2.61; 95% CI = 1.10-6.21) and prolonged length of stay (>10 days; OR = 2.85, 95% CI = 1.41-5.76). This comprehensive analysis of the impact of early mobilization on postoperative complications and length of stay in a large HNC cohort provides novel evidence supporting adherence to the ERAS early mobilization recommendations. Early mobilization should be a priority for patients undergoing HNC surgery with free flap reconstruction.

Surgery & COVID-19: A rapid scoping review of the impact of COVID-19 on surgical services during public health emergencies

BackgroundHealthcare systems globally have been challenged by the COVID-19 pandemic, necessitating the reorganization of surgical services to free capacity within healthcare systems. ObjectivesTo understand how surgical services have been reorganized during and following public health emergencies, and the consequences of these changes for patients, healthcare providers and healthcare systems. MethodsThis rapid scoping review searched academic databases and grey literature sources to identify studies examining surgical service delivery during public health emergencies including COVID-19, and the impact on patients, providers and healthcare systems. Recommendations and guidelines were excluded. Screening was completed in partial (title, abstract) or complete (full text) duplicate following pilot reviews of 50 articles to ensure reliable application of eligibility criteria. ResultsOne hundred and thirty-two studies were included in this review; 111 described reorganization of surgical services, 55 described the consequences of reorganizing surgical services and six reported actions taken to rebuild surgical capacity in public health emergencies. Reorganizations of surgical services were grouped under six domains: case selection/triage, PPE regulations and practice, workforce composition and deployment, outpatient and inpatient patient care, resident and fellow education, and the hospital or clinical environment. Service reorganizations led to large reductions in non-urgent surgical volumes, increases in surgical wait times, and impacted medical training (i.e., reduced case involvement) and patient outcomes (e.g., increases in pain). Strategies for rebuilding surgical capacity were scarce, but focused on the availability of staff, PPE, and patient readiness for surgery as key factors to consider before resuming services. ConclusionsReorganization of surgical services in response to public health emergencies appears to be context-dependent and has far-reaching consequences that must be better understood in order to optimize future health system responses to public health emergencies. ARTICLE SUMMARYO_ST_ABSStrengths and limitations of the studyC_ST_ABSO_LIThis rapid scoping review provides an exhaustive and rigorous summary of the academic and grey literature regarding modifications to surgical services in response to public health emergencies, especially COVID-19. C_LIO_LIThis study did not limit studies based on location or language of publication to ensure a worldwide pandemic had contributions from worldwide voices. C_LIO_LIBoth quantitative and qualitative outcomes were included, with a mix of inductive and deductive data abstraction approaches to provide a comprehensive understanding of surgical services during public health emergencies. C_LIO_LIStudies with potential relevance to this question are emerging at an unprecedented rate in response to the COVID-19 pandemic and as such, some may not be included in the current review. C_LI Original protocol for the studyAs requested, the original unpublished protocol for this study is included as a supplementary file. Funding statementThis study did not receive grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. Competing interest statementAll authors declare that they have no competing interests in accordance with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors uniform declaration of competing interests.