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.

Role of Hypothermia in Adult Cardiac Surgery Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To review studies that assessed systemic hypothermia as an organ protection strategy in adults undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized controlled trials, irrespective of blinding, language, publication status, and date of publication, were identified by searching the Cochrane Central register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase until November 2020. Risk of bias assessment was performed according to Cochrane methodology. Treatment effects were expressed as risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals. Heterogeneity was expressed as I2. INTERVENTIONS: Systemic hypothermia. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Forty-eight trials enrolling 6,690 patients were included in the analysis. Methodologic quality of the studies included was low, mostly due to insufficient allocation concealment or blinding. Random-effects meta-analysis did not resolve uncertainty as to the risks and benefits for hypothermia versus normothermia for key primary and secondary outcomes, including mortality (1.21, 0.94 to 1.56, I2 = 0%) and brain injury (0.87, 0.67 to 1.14, I2 = 0%). Sensitivity analyses restricted to trials at low risk of important bias demonstrated higher mortality with hypothermia (1.70, 1.05 to 2.75, I2 = 0%), with little or no treatment effect on brain injury (1.01, 0.69 to 1.49, I2 = 0%). There was no interaction between cardioplegia temperature and the effects of cardiopulmonary bypass temperature on outcomes. There was insufficient evidence to assess the effects of hypothermia in noncoronary artery bypass graft surgery. CONCLUSION: The existing evidence for an organ-protective effect of hypothermia in adult cardiac surgery is of low quality and inconsistent.