Perioperative anaemia and iron deficiency.

Anaemia affects a third of surgical patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. Iron deficiency is the most common cause of anaemia and can be absolute or functional. Patients may require treatment with oral or intravenous iron.

A scoping review of local quality improvement using data from UK perioperative National Clinical Audits.

BACKGROUND: Significant resources are invested in the UK to collect data for National Clinical Audits (NCAs), but it is unclear whether and how they facilitate local quality improvement (QI). The perioperative setting is a unique context for QI due to its multidisciplinary nature and history of measurement. It is unclear which NCAs evaluate perioperative care, to what extent their data have been used for QI, and which factors influence this usage. METHODS: NCAs were identified from the directories held by Healthcare Quality Improvement Partnership (HQIP), Scottish Healthcare Audits and the Welsh National Clinical Audit and Outcome Review Advisory Committee. QI reports were identified by the following: systematically searching MEDLINE, CINAHL Plus, Web of Science, Embase, Google Scholar and HMIC up to December 2019, hand-searching grey literature and consulting relevant stakeholders. We charted features describing both the NCAs and the QI reports and summarised quantitative data using descriptive statistics and qualitative themes using framework analysis. RESULTS: We identified 36 perioperative NCAs in the UK and 209 reports of local QI which used data from 19 (73%) of these NCAs. Six (17%) NCAs contributed 185 (89%) of these reports. Only one NCA had a registry of local QI projects. The QI reports were mostly brief, unstructured, often published by NCAs themselves and likely subject to significant reporting bias. Factors reported to influence local QI included the following: perceived data validity, measurement of clinical processes as well as outcomes, timely feedback, financial incentives, sharing of best practice, local improvement capabilities and time constraints of clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited public reporting of UK perioperative NCA data for local QI, despite evidence of improvement of most NCA metrics at the national level. It is therefore unclear how these improvements are being made, and it is likely that opportunities are being missed to share learning between local sites. We make recommendations for how NCAs could better support the conduct, evaluation and reporting of local QI and suggest topics which future research should investigate. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO: CRD42018092993 ).

The Perioperative Quality Improvement Programme (PQIP patient study): protocol for a UK multicentre, prospective cohort study to measure quality of care and outcomes after major surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Major surgery accounts for a substantial proportion of health service activity, due not only to the primary procedure, but the longer-term health implications of poor short-term outcome. Data from small studies or from outside the UK indicate that rates of complications and failure to rescue vary between hospitals, as does compliance with best practice processes. Within the UK, there is currently no system for monitoring postoperative complications (other than short-term mortality) in major non-cardiac surgery. Further, there is variation between national audit programmes, in the emphasis placed on quality assurance versus quality improvement, and therefore the principles of measurement and reporting which are used to design such programmes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The PQIP patient study is a multi-centre prospective cohort study which recruits patients undergoing major surgery. Patient provide informed consent and contribute baseline and outcome data from their perspective using a suite of patient-reported outcome tools. Research and clinical staff complete data on patient risk factors and outcomes in-hospital, including two measures of complications. Longer-term outcome data are collected through patient feedback and linkage to national administrative datasets (mortality and readmissions). As well as providing a uniquely granular dataset for research, PQIP provides feedback to participating sites on their compliance with evidence-based processes and their patients' outcomes, with the aim of supporting local quality improvement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by the Health Research Authority in the UK. Dissemination of interim findings (non-inferential) will form a part of the improvement methodology and will be provided to participating centres at regular intervals, including near-real time feedback of key process measures. Inferential analyses will be published in the peer-reviewed literature, supported by a comprehensive multi-modal communications strategy including to patients, policy makers and academic audiences as well as clinicians.

Delivery of drinking, eating and mobilising (DrEaMing) and its association with length of hospital stay after major noncardiac surgery: observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery pathways are associated with improved postoperative outcomes. However, as enhanced recovery pathways have become more complex and varied, compliance has reduced. The 'DrEaMing' bundle re-prioritises early postoperative delivery of drinking, eating, and mobilising. We investigated relationships between DrEaMing compliance, postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS), and complications in a prospective multicentre major surgical cohort. METHODS: We interrogated the UK Perioperative Quality Improvement Programme dataset. Analyses were conducted in four stages. In an exploratory cohort, we identified independent predictors of DrEaMing. We quantified the association between delivery of DrEaMing (and its component variables) and prolonged LOS in a homogenous colorectal subgroup and assessed generalisability in multispecialty patients. Finally, LOS and complications were compared across hospitals, stratified by DrEaMing compliance. RESULTS: The exploratory cohort comprised 22 218 records, the colorectal subgroup 7230, and the multispecialty subgroup 5713. DrEaMing compliance was 59% (13 112 patients), 60% (4341 patients), and 60% (3421), respectively, but varied substantially between hospitals. Delivery of DrEaMing predicted reduced odds of prolonged LOS in colorectal (odds ratio 0.51 [0.43-0.59], P<0.001) and multispecialty cohorts (odds ratio 0.47 [0.41-0.53], P<0.001). At the hospital level, complications were not the primary determinant of LOS after colorectal surgery, but consistent delivery of DrEaMing was associated with significantly shorter LOS. CONCLUSIONS: Delivery of bundled and unbundled DrEaMing was associated with substantial reductions in postoperative LOS, independent of the effects of confounder variables. Consistency of process delivery, and not complications, predicted shorter hospital-level length of stay. DrEaMing may be adopted by perioperative health systems as a quality metric to support improved patient outcomes and reduced hospital length of stay.

Patient-reported outcomes for ambulatory surgery.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss the importance of validated tools that measure patient-reported outcomes and their use in ambulatory surgery. RECENT FINDINGS: Sustained increases in ambulatory surgical care reflect advances in surgical techniques and perioperative anaesthetic care. Use of patient-reported outcomes allows identification of minor adverse events that are more common in this population compared with traditional endpoints such as mortality. Variability in reported outcomes restricts research potential and limits the ability to benchmark providers. The standardized endpoints in perioperative medicine initiative's recommendations on patient-reported outcomes and patient comfort measures are relevant to evaluating ambulatory care. Combining validated generic and disease-specific patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) examines the widest spectrum of outcomes. Technological advances can be used to facilitate outcome measurement in ambulatory surgery with digital integration optimizing accurate real-time data collection. Telephone or web-based applications for reviewing ambulatory patients were found to be acceptable in multiple international settings and should be harnessed to allow remote follow-up. SUMMARY: Use of validated tools to measure patient-reported outcomes allows internal and external quality comparison. Tools can be combined to measure objective outcomes and patient satisfaction. These are both key factors in driving forward improvements in perioperative ambulatory surgical care.

Translation of national guidelines into local practice.

BACKGROUND: Addressing themes raised by the Royal College of Anaesthetists National Audit Project 4, we introduced new training programmes to improve the knowledge and skills necessary for the management of airway crises. A further large-scale multimodal training programme was introduced to implement guidelines published in 2015 by the Difficult Airway Society (DAS). METHODS: In 2014, questionnaires were used to assess the knowledge necessary to manage the unanticipated difficult airway before and after high-fidelity simulation sessions. In 2016, surveys assessed knowledge of new DAS guidelines before and 5 months after the implementation of a large-scale targeted teaching programme to educate staff. RESULTS: In 2014, 20 anaesthetic teams (75 delegates) attended high-fidelity simulations and demonstrated a significant immediate improvement in knowledge. In 2016, 185 participants attended a targeted teaching programme. Although after the teaching programme an increased number of anaesthetists reported having accessed training, there was a persistent knowledge gap, with some details retained by as few as 15% of participants. DISCUSSION: Whereas the knowledge of these important guidelines was improved in the immediate aftermath of high-fidelity simulation training, the knowledge retention was disappointing, raising questions as to why knowledge of highly important techniques used in crises was so poor. We ask whether training should be compulsory and how knowledge retention might be improved across all health care disciplines that rely on guidelines for the effective management of rarely occurring but safety-critical events.

Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing Has no Additive Incremental Value to Standard Scoring Systems when Risk Stratifying for Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) can identify patients at risk of adverse post-operative outcomes following major abdominal surgery including bariatric surgery. Scoring systems that also aim to predict post-operative outcome in this group include the validated obesity surgery mortality risk score (OSMRS). This study aims to investigate if CPET has additive value to other scoring systems in predicting post-operative outcomes following bariatric surgery. METHODS: Data was collected retrospectively on 398 patients who underwent CPET between October 2008 and April 2013. CPET data, medical history, complication rates and length of stay (LOS) were obtained from patient records. Data was analysed to investigate the relationship between CPET and other scoring systems with post-operative outcome. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty patients underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy. Median LOS was 4 days (IQR 4-6 days) and 41 patients (16.4 %) developed a complication. Adjusted data showed a risk difference for complications of 17 % (95 % CI 9-25 %) between high- and low-risk patients stratified by OSMRS alongside a 27 % (95 % CI 12-45 %) longer LOS. Variation in AT or peak VO2 showed no significant relationship with complications or LOS. Amongst high OSMRS risk patients, there was no significant difference in complications or LOS when CPET data was added to this analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing adds no incremental value in predicting post-operative outcomes in the bariatric population compared to the OSMRS, which is strongly predictive of length of stay and complication following bariatric surgery.

Comparison of esophageal Doppler and plethysmographic variability index to guide intraoperative fluid therapy for low-risk patients undergoing colorectal surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate if there is equivalence in volumes of fluid administered when intravenous fluid therapy is guided by Pleth Variability Index (PVI) compared to the established technology of esophageal Doppler in low-risk patients undergoing major colorectal surgery. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Operating room. PATIENTS: Forty low-risk patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. INTERVENTION: Patients were monitored by esophageal Doppler and PVI probes and were randomized to have fluid therapy directed by using one of these technologies, with 250 mL boluses of colloid to maintain a maximal stroke volume, or a PVI of less than 14%. MEASUREMENTS: Absolute volumes of fluid volumes given intraoperatively were measured as were 24 hours fluid volumes. Perioperative measurements of lactate and base excess were recorded as were postoperative complications. MAIN RESULT: There was no significant difference between PVI and esophageal Doppler groups in mean total fluid administered (1286 vs 1520 mL, P=.300) or mean intraoperative fluid balance (+839 v+1145 mL, P=.150). CONCLUSIONS: PVI offers an entirely non-invasive alternative for goal-directed fluid therapy in this group of patients.