Current Trends in Mortality Attributable to Racial or Ethnic Disparities in Post-Surgical Population in The United States: A Population-Based Study.

Background: No study has contextualized the excess mortality attributable to racial and ethnic disparities in surgical outcomes. Further, not much effort has been made to quantify the effort needed to eliminate these disparities. Objective: We examined the current trends in mortality attributable to racial or ethnic disparities in the US postsurgical population. We then identified the target for mortality reduction that would be necessary to eliminate these disparities by 2030. Methods: We performed a population-based study of 1,512,974 high-risk surgical procedures among adults (18-64 years) performed across US hospitals between 2000 and 2020. Results: Between 2000 and 2020, the risk-adjusted mortality rates declined for all groups. Nonetheless, Black patients were more likely to die following surgery (adjusted relative risk 1.42; 95% CI, 1.39-1.46) driven by higher Black mortality in the northeast (1.60; 95% CI, 1.52-1.68), as well as the West (1.53; 95% CI, 1.43-1.62). Similarly, mortality risk remained consistently higher for Hispanics compared with White patients (1.21; 95% CI, 1.19-1.24), driven by higher mortality in the West (1.26; 95% CI, 1.21-1.31). Overall, 8364 fewer deaths are required for Black patients to experience mortality on the same scale as White patients. Similar figures for Hispanic patients are 4388. To eliminate the disparity between Black and White patients by 2030, we need a 2.7% annualized reduction in the projected mortality among Black patients. For Hispanics, the annualized reduction needed is 0.8%. Conclusions: Our data provides a framework for incorporating population and health systems measures for eliminating disparity in surgical mortality within the next decade.

A Multi-Site Survey Study on the Association Between the COVID-19 Pandemic and United States Anesthesiology Residents' Mental Health.

BACKGROUND:  At the onset of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, anesthesiology residency programs were impacted differently due to various factors such as the local severity of COVID-19, exposure to patient suffering, and inability to complete rotations. We sought to investigate the impact of local-level pandemic severity on the well-being of anesthesiology residents. METHODS:  This multi-site study surveyed postgraduate year two residents from 15 United States (US) anesthesiology programs using the Perceived Stress Scale, Mini-Z, Patient Health Questionnaire-9,WHO-5 Well-Being Index,and the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support before the pandemic (baseline survey) and during the first COVID-19 surge (post survey). RESULTS:  A total of 144 (65%) residents responded to the initial baseline survey; 73 (33%) responded to the post survey, and 49 (22%) completed both surveys. There was not a statistically significant difference in any well-being outcomes of participants between the surveys, nor was there a significant difference based on the severity of COVID-19 impact at the program's hospital. Male participants had higher perceived stress scores (ß = 4.05, 95%CI: 0.42, 7.67, P = 0.03) and lower social support from family (ß = -6.57, 95%CI: -11.64, -1.51, P = 0.01) at the post survey compared to female participants after controlling for baseline scores. Additionally, married participants or those with domestic partners reported higher perceived social support in the post survey (ß = 5.79, 95%CI: -0.65, 12.23, P = 0.03). CONCLUSION:  The local COVID-19 severity at a residency program did not disproportionately impact well-being scores among anesthesiology residents. Those most vulnerable to diminished well-being appeared to be male and single participants. As a result, targeted well-being interventions, including those aiming to increase social support, to higher-risk resident groups may be indicated. Future work is needed to assess the longstanding COVID-19 pandemic impacts on resident well-being.

Association of Severe Obesity and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease With Pneumonia Following Non-Cardiac Surgery.

Background: Pneumonia is the third most common surgical complication after urinary tract infection and wound infections. In addition to increased mortality, patients who develop postoperative pneumonia have a higher risk of prolonged hospital stay, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions, and higher healthcare costs. Obesity and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) are both independent risk factors for the development and severity of postoperative pneumonia, although the combined effect of these comorbidities is unknown. Therefore, we evaluated whether the combination of severe obesity and COPD is associated with an increased risk of postoperative pneumonia. Methods: We performed a multicenter retrospective cohort study of 365,273 patients aged 18 - 64 years who were either severely obese (body mass index (BMI) ≥ 40 kg/m2) or normal-weight (BMI between 18.6 and 24.9 kg/m2) and underwent general surgery, orthopedic surgery, neurosurgery, otolaryngology surgery, urology surgery, and vascular surgery in the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) participating hospitals from 2014 to 2018. We evaluated the combined effect of COPD and severe obesity on the risk for postoperative pneumonia, unplanned tracheal reintubation, and extended length of stay. Results: The co-occurrence of severe obesity and COPD appeared to have a protective effect on the risk of postoperative pneumonia. In the presence of COPD, patients with severe obesity were 14% less likely to develop pneumonia compared to their normal-weight counterparts (2.9% vs. 4.4%; adjusted relative risk (RR): 0.76; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.60, 0.95). In addition, in the presence of COPD, severe obesity conferred a lower risk for requiring an extended length of stay (37.6% vs. 47.9%; adjusted RR: 0.83; 95% CI: 0.78, 0.89). Conclusions: Counterintuitively, the co-occurrence of severe obesity with COPD appeared to buffer the negative impact of COPD on postoperative pneumonia, unplanned tracheal reintubation, and prolonged hospital stay after noncardiac surgery. These findings are consistent with the obesity paradox and warrant further investigations.

Caring for Parturients with Substance Use Disorders.

Parturients with substance use disorder require expertise to manage the complexity of intoxication, withdrawal, and chronic use as well as ensure adequate analgesia throughout labor. Opioid use disorder in pregnancy has increased more than 4-fold in the past decade, with a 50-fold geographic variability that now dwarfs other substance use in this population. Understanding not only the medical but also the public health and criminal justice implications of substance use disorder is essential to providing optimal care to this at-risk population.

Perineural Liposomal Bupivacaine Is Not Superior to Nonliposomal Bupivacaine for Peripheral Nerve Block Analgesia.

BACKGROUND: Liposomal bupivacaine is purported to extend analgesia of peripheral nerve blocks when administered perineurally. However, evidence of the clinical effectiveness of perineural liposomal bupivacaine is mixed. This meta-analysis seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of perineural liposomal bupivacaine in improving peripheral nerve block analgesia as compared with nonliposomal local anesthetics. METHODS: The authors identified randomized trials evaluating the effectiveness of peripheral nerve block analgesic that compared liposomal bupivacaine with nonliposomal local anesthetics. The primary outcome was the difference in area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC) of the pooled 24- to 72-h rest pain severity scores. Secondary outcomes included postoperative analgesic consumption, time to first analgesic request, incidence of opioid-related side effects, patient satisfaction, length of hospital stay, liposomal bupivacaine side effects, and functional recovery. AUC pain scores were interpreted in light of a minimal clinically important difference of 2.0 cm · h. RESULTS: Nine trials (619 patients) were analyzed. When all trials were pooled, AUC pain scores ± SD at 24 to 72 h were 7.6 ± 4.9 cm · h and 6.6 ± 4.6 cm · h for nonliposomal and liposomal bupivacaine, respectively. As such, perineural liposomal bupivacaine provided a clinically unimportant benefit by improving the AUC (95% CI) of 24- to 72-h pain scores by 1.0 cm · h (0.5 to 1.6; P = 0.003) compared with nonliposomal bupivacaine. Excluding an industry-sponsored trial rendered the difference between the groups nonsignificant (0.7 cm · h [-0.1 to 1.5]; P = 0.100). Secondary outcome analysis did not uncover any additional benefits to liposomal bupivacaine in pain severity at individual timepoints up to 72 h, analgesic consumption, time to first analgesic request, opioid-related side effects, patient satisfaction, length of hospital stay, and functional recovery. No liposomal bupivacaine side effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Perineural liposomal bupivacaine provided a statistically significant but clinically unimportant improvement in the AUC of postoperative pain scores compared with plain local anesthetic. Furthermore, this benefit was rendered nonsignificant after excluding an industry-sponsored trial, and liposomal bupivacaine was found to be not different from plain local anesthetics for postoperative pain and all other analgesic and functional outcomes. High-quality evidence does not support the use of perineural liposomal bupivacaine over nonliposomal bupivacaine for peripheral nerve blocks.

Be Active and Be Well? A Cross-sectional Survey of US Anesthesia Residents.

BACKGROUND: Wellness among resident physicians is important to their well-being and ability to provide clinical care. The relationship between physical activity and wellness among anesthesia residents has not yet been evaluated. We surveyed anesthesia residents to evaluate their levels of physical activity and self-perceived wellness scores. We hypothesized that residents with high self-reported physical activity levels would be more likely to have higher wellness scores. METHODS: Three hundred and twenty-three anesthesia residents were invited to participate in this cross-sectional survey study. The survey included questions regarding demographics (age, gender, clinical anesthesia year, work hours), physical activity (based off the US Department of Health and Human Services [USDHHS] guidelines), and wellness (using the Satisfaction With Life Scale). The relationship between wellness and physical activity levels was evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred forty-one residents responded (43.6% response rate). Thirty-eight (27.1%) residents met our activity threshold for physically active. Eighty-six respondents (61.4%) were classified as having high wellness based on their survey answers. No significant associations were found between demographic data and wellness, including age or clinical anesthesia training year. Among those residents who described physical activity consistent with USDHHS guidelines, 29 (76.3%) had high wellness scores. After logistic regression analysis, residents who achieved the physical activity guidelines were more likely to have high wellness scores (odds ratio 2.54, 95% confidence interval 1.13-6.20, P value .03). CONCLUSIONS: Anesthesia resident physicians with high physical activity levels had higher self-perceived wellness scores.

COVID-Activated Emergency Scaling of Anesthesiology Responsibilities Intensive Care Unit.

In response to the rapidly evolving coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and the potential need for physicians to provide critical care services, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) has collaborated with the Society of Critical Care Anesthesiologists (SOCCA), the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM), and the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation (APSF) to develop the COVID-Activated Emergency Scaling of Anesthesiology Responsibilities (CAESAR) Intensive Care Unit (ICU) workgroup. CAESAR-ICU is designed and written for the practicing general anesthesiologist and should serve as a primer to enable an anesthesiologist to provide limited bedside critical care services.

Comparison of Phenylephrine and Ephedrine in Treatment of Spinal-Induced Hypotension in High-Risk Pregnancies: A Narrative Review.

PURPOSE: To compare maternal and fetal effects of intravenous phenylephrine and ephedrine administration during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery in high-risk pregnancies. SOURCE: An extensive literature search was conducted using the US National Library of Medicine, MEDLINE search engine, Cochrane review, and Google Scholar using search terms "ephedrine and phenylephrine," "preterm and term and spinal hypotension," "preeclampsia and healthy parturients," or "multiple and singleton gestation and vasopressor." Society of Obstetric Anesthesia and Perinatology meeting abstracts for the past 4 years were also searched for relevant studies. PRINCIPLE FINDINGS: Both phenylephrine and ephedrine can be safely used to counteract hypotension after spinal anesthesia in patients with uteroplacental insufficiency, pregnancy-induced hypertension, and in non-elective cesarean deliveries. Vasopressor requirements before delivery in high-risk cesarean sections are reduced compared to healthy parturients. Among the articles reviewed, there were no statistically significant differences in umbilical arterial pH, umbilical venous pH, incidence of fetal acidosis, Apgar scores, or maternal hypotension when comparing maternal phenylephrine and ephedrine use. CONCLUSION: From the limited existing data, phenylephrine and ephedrine are both appropriate selections for treating or preventing hypotension induced by neuraxial blockade in high-risk pregnancies. There is no clear evidence that either medication is more effective at maintaining maternal blood pressure or has a superior safety profile in this setting. Further investigations are required to determine the efficacy, ideal dosing regimens, and overall safety of phenylephrine and ephedrine administration in high-risk obstetric patients, especially in the presence uteroplacental insufficiency.

Preventing Ventilator-Associated Lung Injury: A Perioperative Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Research into the prevention of ventilator-associated lung injury (VALI) in patients with acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) in the intensive care unit (ICU) has resulted in the development of a number of lung protective strategies, which have become commonplace in the treatment of critically ill patients. An increasing number of studies have applied lung protective ventilation in the operating room to otherwise healthy individuals. We review the history of lung protective strategies in patients with acute respiratory failure and explore their use in patients undergoing mechanical ventilation during general anesthesia. We aim to provide context for a discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of lung protective ventilation, as well as to inform future areas of research. METHODS: We completed a database search and reviewed articles investigating lung protective ventilation in both the ICU and in patients receiving general anesthesia through May 2015. RESULTS: Lung protective ventilation was associated with improved outcomes in patients with acute respiratory failure in the ICU. Clinical evidence is less clear regarding lung protective ventilation for patients undergoing surgery. CONCLUSION: Lung protective ventilation strategies, including low tidal volume ventilation and moderate positive end-expiratory pressure, are well established therapies to minimize lung injury in critically ill patients with and without lung disease, and may provide benefit to patients undergoing general anesthesia.

Noise Levels in Surgical ICUs Are Consistently Above Recommended Standards.

OBJECTIVE: The equipment, monitor alarms, and acuity of patients in ICUs make it one of the loudest patient care areas in a hospital. Increased sound levels may contribute to worsened outcomes in these particularly vulnerable patients. Our objective was to determine whether ambient sound levels in surgical ICUs comply with recommendations established by the World Health Organization and Environmental Protection Agency, and whether implementation of an overnight "quiet time" intervention is associated with lower ambient sound levels. DESIGN: Prospective, observational cohort study. SETTING: Two comparable 18-bed, surgical ICUs in a large, teaching hospital. Only one ICU had a formal overnight quiet time policy at the start of the study period. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Sound levels were measured in 30-second blocks at preselected locations during the day and night over a period of 6 weeks using a simple, hand-held sound meter. All sound measurements in both units at all times exceeded recommended standards. Median minimum sound levels were lower at night in both units (50.8 and 50.3 vs 53.1 and 51.0 dB, p = 0.0003 and p = 0.009) and were similar between the two units (p = 0.52). The maximum overnight sound levels were statistically lower in the unit with the quiet time intervention implemented (62.5 vs 59.6 dB; p = 0.0040) and decreased overnight immediately after implementation of quiet time in the other unit (62.5 vs 56.1 dB; p < 0.0001). Maximum sound levels were lower inside patient rooms (52.2 vs 55.3 dB; p = 0.004), but minimum sound levels were similar (49.1 vs 49.2 dB; p = 0.23). Linear regression analysis showed that ICU census did not significantly influence sound levels. CONCLUSIONS: Ambient sound levels in the surgical ICUs were consistently above levels recommended by the World Health Organization and Environmental Protection Agency at all times. The use of a formal quiet time intervention was associated with a significant, but clinically irrelevant reduction in the median maximum sound level at night. Our results suggest that excessive ambient noise in the ICU is largely attributable to environmental factors, and behavior modifications are unlikely to have a meaningful impact. Future investigations, as well as hospital designs, should target interventions toward ubiquitous noise sources such as ventilation systems, which may not traditionally be associated with patient care.

Complications of bronchoscopy: A concise synopsis.

Flexible and rigid bronchoscopes are used in diagnosis, therapeutics, and palliation. While their use is widespread, effective, and generally safe; there are numerous potential complications that can occur. Mechanical complications of bronchoscopy are primarily related to airway manipulations or bleeding. Systemic complications arise from the procedure itself, medication administration (primarily sedation), or patient comorbidities. Attributable mortality rates remain low at < 0.1% for fiberoptic and rigid bronchoscopy. Here we review the complications (classified as mechanical or systemic) of both rigid and flexible bronchoscopy in hope of making practitioners who are operators of these tools, and those who consult others for interventions, aware of potential problems, and pitfalls in order to enhance patient safety and comfort.

Effects of parecoxib on analgesia benefit and blood loss following open prostatectomy: a multicentre randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This multi-centre, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was designed to test the hypotheses that parecoxib improves patients' postoperative analgesia without increasing surgical blood loss following radical open prostatectomy. METHODS: 105 patients (64 ± 7 years old) were randomized to receive either parecoxib or placebo with concurrent morphine patient controlled analgesia. Cumulative opioid consumption (primary objective) and the overall benefit of analgesia score (OBAS), the modified brief pain inventory short form (m-BPI-sf), the opioid-related symptom distress scale (OR-SDS), and perioperative blood loss (secondary objectives) were assessed. RESULTS: In each group 48 patients received the study medication for 48 hours postoperatively. Parecoxib significantly reduced cumulative opioid consumption by 24% (43 ± 24.1 mg versus 57 ± 28 mg, mean ± SD, p=0.02), translating into improved benefit of analgesia (OBAS: 2(0/4) versus 3(1/5.25), p=0.01), pain severity (m-BPI-sf: 1(1/2) versus 2(2/3), p < 0.01) and pain interference (m-BPI-sf: 1(0/1) versus 1(1/3), p=0.001), as well as reduced opioid-related side effects (OR-SDS score: 0.3(0.075/0.51) versus 0.4(0.2/0.83), p=0.03). Blood loss was significantly higher at 24 hours following surgery in the parecoxib group (4.3 g⋅dL(-1) (3.6/4.9) versus (3.2 g⋅dL(-1) (2.4/4.95), p=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Following major abdominal surgery, parecoxib significantly improves patients' perceived analgesia. Parecoxib may however increase perioperative blood loss. Further trials are needed to evaluate the effects of selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors on blood loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00346268.