Implementing a thermal care bundle for inadvertent perioperative hypothermia: A cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Active warming reduces risk of surgical complications. Implementation of a perioperative thermal care bundle increased use of active warming for surgical patients. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine if implementing a thermal care bundle to prevent inadvertent perioperative hypothermia is cost-effective. DESIGN: A model-based cost-effectiveness analysis was undertaken using Monte Carlo simulations from input distributions to estimate costs and effects. SETTING: Hospitals undertaking between 5,000 and 40,000 surgeries per year, which either implemented or did not implement the thermal care bundle, were modelled. PARTICIPANTS: The decision tree guiding the structure of the model was populated with clinical outcomes (surgical site infection, blood transfusion requirement and morbid cardiac events) of a hypothetical cohort of surgical patients. INTERVENTIONS: Implementation or non-implementation of the thermal care bundle. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Net monetary benefit was calculated by multiplying the health benefits (quality-adjusted life years) by the willingness-to-pay threshold minus the cost. We tested a range of values for willingness to pay per quality-adjusted life year thresholds and plotted results for expected incremental benefits and probability of cost-effectiveness. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was also calculated. RESULTS: Thermal care bundle implementation simultaneously reduced costs and increased quality-adjusted life years in the majority of simulations (88.1%). The average cost reduction was $689,659 (95% credible intervals spanned from a $2,718,364 decrease in costs to $379,826 increase in costs) and average difference in quality-adjusted life years was 54 (95% CI = 0.4 less to 176 more). This equated to an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $12747 saved per quality-adjusted life year gained. CONCLUSIONS: It is likely that increasing use of active warming by implementing the thermal care bundle would generate cost-savings and improve the quality of life for surgical patients. It would be good value for hospitals with similar characteristics to those included in our model to allocate the extra resources required for implementation.

Difficulties in funding of VA-ECMO therapy for patients with severe accidental hypothermia.

BACKGROUND: Severe accidental hypothermia is defined as a core temperature below 28 Celsius degrees. Within the last years, the issue of accidental hypothermia and accompanying cardiac arrest has been broadly discussed and European Resuscitation Council (ERC) Guidelines underline the importance of Extracorporeal Rewarming (ECR) in treatment of severely hypothermic victims. The study aimed to evaluate the actual costs of ECR with VA-ECMO and of further management in the Intensive Care Unit of patients admitted to the Severe Accidental Hypothermia Centre in Cracow, Poland. METHODS: We carried out the economic analysis of 31 hypothermic adults in stage III-IV (Swiss Staging) treated with VA ECMO. Twenty-nine individuals were further managed in the Intensive Care Unit. The actual treatment costs were evaluated based on current medication, equipment, and dressing pricing. The costs incurred by the John Paul II Hospital were then collated with the National Health Service (NHS) funding, assessed based on current financial contract. RESULTS: In most of the cases, the actual treatment cost was greater than the funding received by around 10000 PLN per patient. The positive financial balance was achieved in only 4 (14%) individuals; other 25 cases (86%) showed a financial loss. CONCLUSION: Performed analysis clearly shows that hospitals undertaking ECR may experience financial loss due to implementation of effective treatment recommended by international guidelines. Thanks to new NHS funding policy since January 2017 such loss can be avoided, what shall encourage hospitals to perform this expensive, yet effective method of treatment.

Body Temperature after EMS Transport: Association with Traumatic Brain Injury Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Low body temperatures following prehospital transport are associated with poor outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury (TBI). However, a minimal amount is known about potential associations across a range of temperatures obtained immediately after prehospital transport. Furthermore, a minimal amount is known about the influence of body temperature on non-mortality outcomes. The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation between temperatures obtained immediately following prehospital transport and TBI outcomes across the entire range of temperatures. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included all moderate/severe TBI cases (CDC Barell Matrix Type 1) in the pre-implementation cohort of the Excellence in Prehospital Injury Care (EPIC) TBI Study (NIH/NINDS: 1R01NS071049). Cases were compared across four cohorts of initial trauma center temperature (ITCT): <35.0°C [Very Low Temperature (VLT)]; 35.0-35.9°C [Low Temperature (LT)]; 36.0-37.9°C [Normal Temperature (NT)]; and ≥38.0°C [Elevated Temperature (ET)]. Multivariable analysis was performed adjusting for injury severity score, age, sex, race, ethnicity, blunt/penetrating trauma, and payment source. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for mortality were calculated. To evaluate non-mortality outcomes, deaths were excluded and the adjusted median increase in hospital length of stay (LOS), ICU LOS and total hospital charges were calculated for each ITCT group and compared to the NT group. RESULTS: 22,925 cases were identified and cases with interfacility transfer (7361, 32%), no EMS transport (1213, 5%), missing ITCT (2083, 9%), or missing demographic data (391, 2%) were excluded. Within this study cohort the aORs for death (compared to the NT group) were 2.41 (CI: 1.83-3.17) for VLT, 1.62 (CI: 1.37-1.93) for LT, and 1.86 (CI: 1.52-3.00) for ET. Similarly, trauma center (TC) LOS, ICU LOS, and total TC charges increased in all temperature groups when compared to NT. CONCLUSION: In this large, statewide study of major TBI, both ETs and LTs immediately following prehospital transport were independently associated with higher mortality and with increased TC LOS, ICU LOS, and total TC charges. Further study is needed to identify the causes of abnormal body temperature during the prehospital interval and if in-field measures to prevent temperature variations might improve outcomes.

Postoperative hypothermia and surgical site infection following peritoneal insufflation with warm, humidified carbon dioxide during laparoscopic colorectal surgery: a cohort study with cost-effectiveness analysis.

BACKGROUND: Surgical Site Infection (SSI) occurs in 9 % of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Warming and humidifying carbon dioxide (CO2) used for peritoneal insufflation may protect against SSI by avoiding postoperative hypothermia (itself a risk factor for SSI). This study aimed to assess the impact of CO2 conditioning on postoperative hypothermia and SSI and to perform a cost-effectiveness analysis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colorectal resection was performed at a single UK specialist centre. The control group (n = 123) received peritoneal insufflation with room temperature, dry CO2, whereas the intervention group (n = 123) received warm, humidified CO2 (using HumiGard™, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare). The outcomes were postoperative hypothermia, SSI and costs. Multivariate analysis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 246 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 68 (20-87) and mean BMI 28 (15-51). The primary diagnosis was cancer (n = 173), and there were no baseline differences between the groups. CO2 conditioning significantly decreased the incidence of postoperative hypothermia (odds ratio 0.10, 95 % CI 0.04-0.23), with hypothermic patients found to be at increased risk of SSI (odds ratio 4.0, 95 % CI 1.25-12.9). Use of conditioned CO2 significantly decreased the incidence of SSI by 66 % (p = 0.04). The intervention group incurred costs of £155 less per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was negative. CONCLUSION: CO2 conditioning during laparoscopic colorectal surgery is a safe, feasible and a cost-effective intervention. It improves the quality of surgical care relating to SSI and postoperative hypothermia.

Value of extended warming in patients undergoing elective surgery.

Perioperative temperature management is imperative for positive surgical outcomes. This study assessed the clinical and wellbeing benefits of extending normothermia by using a portable warming gown. A total of 94 patients undergoing elective surgery were enrolled. They were randomized pre-operatively to either a portable warming gown or the standard warming procedure. The warming gown stayed with patients from pre-op to operating room to postrecovery room discharge. Core temperature was tracked throughout the study. Patients also provided responses to a satisfaction and comfort status survey. The change in average core temperature did not differ significantly between groups (P = 0.23). A nonsignificant 48% relative decrease in hypothermic events was observed for the extended warming group (P = 0.12). Patients receiving the warming gown were more likely to report always having their temperature controlled (P = 0.04) and significantly less likely to request additional blankets for comfort (P = 0.006). Clinical outcomes and satisfaction were improved for patients with extended warming.

A clinical evaluation of the cost and time effectiveness of the ASPAN Hypothermia Guideline.

It is known that perioperative hypothermia increases the cost of care and places surgical patients at increased risk for adverse outcomes. The American Society of PeriAnesthesia Nurses (ASPAN) developed the Clinical Guideline for the Prevention of Unplanned Perioperative Hypothermia to specify a systematic approach to the maintenance of normothermia in surgical patients, making use of newer active warming technologies as well as passive warming techniques. The purpose of this study was to test the cost and time effectiveness of the ASPAN Hypothermia Guideline as compared with usual care. Our findings indicate that the Hypothermia Guideline, which is known to employ practices effective for maintaining normothermia, is clinically feasible and can be implemented without significant increases in cost or time for an ambulatory surgical unit.

[Perioperative thermal management]. / Perioperatives Wärmemanagement.

Perioperative hypothermia can influence clinical outcome negatively. It triples the incidence of adverse myocardial outcomes, significantly increases perioperative blood loss, significantly augments allogenic transfusion requirements, and increases the incidence of surgical wound infections. The major causes are redistribution of heat from the core of the body to the peripheral tissues and a negative heat balance. Adequate thermal management includes preoperative and intraoperative measures. Preoperative measures, e.g., prewarming, enhance heat content of the peripheral tissues, thereby reducing redistribution of heat from the core to the peripheral tissues after induction of anesthesia. Intraoperative measures are active skin surface warming of a large body surface area with conductive or convective warming systems. Intravenous fluids should be warmed when large volumes of more than 500-1000 ml/h are required. The body surfaces that cannot be actively warmed should be insulated. Airway humidification and conductive warming of the back are less efficient.

Maintaining intraoperative normothermia: a meta-analysis of outcomes with costs.

The present study used a meta-analysis to examine 4 questions about intraoperative hypothermia. The questions addressed were as follows: (1) Is the difference in adverse patient outcomes between normothermic and mildly hypothermic patient groups significant across studies and within studies? (2) What is the magnitude of the difference in adverse patient outcomes across studies? (3) What are the costs resulting from the difference in adverse patient outcomes? (4) Does a significant difference exist in effectiveness of modality for maintaining intraoperative normothermia? The results of this meta-analytic study provide evidence that the difference in adverse patient outcomes between the normothermic and mildly hypothermic patients is significant across studies for all adverse outcomes examined. The magnitude of this difference and the costs resulting from these adverse outcomes are presented. In addition, a significant difference in effectiveness between warming modalities for maintaining intraoperative normothermia was found. A significant increase in the risk of costly complications occurred when patient temperatures dropped a mean of 1.5 degrees C. For example, patients who become mildly hypothermic are much more likely to receive blood transfusions and to develop infections; both of these outcomes result in increased costs. Minimizing adverse outcomes is critical to cost-effective patient care in today's competitive healthcare environment. The cost of preventing intraoperative hypothermia is much less than the cost of treating the adverse outcomes that affect patients experiencing intraoperative hypothermia. Meta-analytic results allowed us to conclude that hypothermia averaging only 1.5 degrees C less than normal resulted in cumulative adverse outcomes adding between $2,500 and $7,000 per surgical patient to hospitalization costs across a variety of surgical procedures. In conclusion, patients whose temperatures have been maintained at normal levels during the intraoperative period experience fewer adverse outcomes, and their overall hospital costs are lower. Intraoperative normothermia is maintained more effectively with the use of forced air warming.