Predicting Death or Disability after Surgery in the Older Adult.

BACKGROUND: Older patients are vulnerable to developing new or worsening disability after surgery. Despite this, patient or surgical characteristics predisposing to postoperative disability are poorly defined. The aim of the study was to develop and validate a model, subsequently transformed to point-score form, to predict 6-month death or disability in older patients after surgery. METHODS: The authors built a prospective, single-center registry to develop and validate the prediction model. The registry included patients 70 yr of age or older undergoing elective and nonelective, cardiac and noncardiac surgery between May 25, 2017, and February 11, 2021, and combined clinical data from the electronic medical record, hospital administrative data (International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Australian Modification codes) and World Health Organization (Geneva, Switzerland) Disability Assessment Schedule data collected directly from the patients. Death or disability was defined as being dead or having a World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule score 16% or greater. Included patients were randomly divided into model development (70%) and internal validation (30%) cohorts. Once constructed, the logistic regression and point-score models were assessed using the internal validation cohort and an external validation cohort comprising data from a separate randomized trial. RESULTS: Of 2,176 patients who completed the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule immediately before surgery, 927 (43%) patients were disabled, and 413 (19%) had significant disability. By 6 months after surgery, 1,640 patients (75%) had data available for the primary outcome analysis. Of these patients, 195 (12%) patients had died, and 691 (42%) were dead or disabled. The developed point-score model included the preoperative World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule score, patient age, dementia, and chronic kidney disease. The point score model retained good discrimination in the internal (area under the curve, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.79) and external (area under the curve, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.74 to 0.80) validation data sets. CONCLUSIONS: The authors developed and validated a point score model to predict death or disability in older patients after surgery.

Perioperative outcomes in intermediate and high-risk patients after major surgery following introduction of a dedicated perioperative medicine team: A single centre cohort study.

Intermediate and high-risk patients undergoing surgery are often managed on a surgical ward in the absence of haemodynamic or ventilatory support requirements necessitating intensive care unit or high dependency unit admission. We describe a model of care for the multidisciplinary management of selected postoperative patients and the epidemiology of patients managed using this model at a tertiary Australian hospital.Of 25,139 patients undergoing inpatient surgery at our institution over a two-year period, 506 (2%) were referred to the Perioperative Medicine team. The median age of patients referred was 74 years; 85% had an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status ≥3, and 44% underwent emergency surgery. Major complication or death within 30 days was 44.2% (213/482). The most common complications, as defined by the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program were transfusion within 72 h (17.4%), pneumonia/aspiration pneumonitis (11.3%), and acute renal failure (10.6%); median time to Medical Emergency Team call was 146 (interquartile range 77-279) h.Sixty-six percent of referred patients (280/423) required an intervention during their time under the service. This high incidence indicates that this population of patients merits closer attention, including routine measurement and reporting of postoperative outcomes to monitor and improve quality of care at our institution as part of an integrated perioperative service. We believe that with so much current focus on perioperative medicine, it is important we translate this to clinical care by evolving traditional models of management into more innovative strategies to meet the complex demands of today's surgical patients.

Measurement properties of the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 for evaluating functional status after inpatient surgery.

BACKGROUND: Expert recommendations propose the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0 as a core outcome measure in surgical studies, yet data on its long-term measurement properties remain limited. These were evaluated in a secondary analysis of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) prospective cohort. METHODS: Participants were adults (40 years of age or older) who underwent inpatient non-cardiac surgery. The 12-item WHODAS and EQ-5DTM-3L questionnaires were administered preoperatively (in person) and 1 year postoperatively (by telephone). Responsiveness was characterized using standardized response means (SRMs) and correlation coefficients between change scores. Construct validity was evaluated using correlation coefficients between 1-year scores and comparisons of WHODAS scores across clinically relevant subgroups. RESULTS: The analysis included 546 patients. There was moderate correlation between changes in WHODAS and various EQ-5DTM subscales. The strongest correlation was between changes in WHODAS and changes in the functional domains of the EQ-5D-3L-for example, mobility (Spearman's rho 0.40, 95 per cent confidence interval [c.i.] 0.32 to 0.48) and usual activities (rho 0.45, 95 per cent c.i. 0.30 to 0.52). When compared across quartiles of EQ-5D index change, median WHODAS scores followed expected patterns of change. In subgroups with expected functional status changes, the WHODAS SRMs ranged from 'small' to 'large' in the expected directions of change. At 1 year, the WHODAS demonstrated convergence with the EQ-5D-3L functional domains, and good discrimination between patients with expected differences in functional status. CONCLUSION: The WHODAS questionnaire has construct validity and responsiveness as a measure of functional status at 1 year after major surgery.

Surgery can have a long-lasting impact on a person's 'functional status', which is their ability to carry out routine functions of daily living (e.g. work, chores, and social activity). International societies now recommend that functional status be routinely measured in research studies of patients having surgery. A potential instrument to measure functional status in patients having surgery is the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule (WHODAS) 2.0. The WHODAS 2.0 was originally designed to measure function and disability in a general population (i.e. not patients having surgery). In this study, we show that the WHODAS 2.0 has acceptable performance when measuring functional status in patients having surgery.

Postoperative anaemia and patient-centred outcomes after major abdominal surgery: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Compared with anaemia before surgery, the underlying pathogenesis and implications of postoperative anaemia are largely unknown. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study analysed prospective data obtained from 2983 adult patients across 47 centres enrolled in a clinical trial evaluating restrictive and liberal intravenous fluids. The primary endpoint was persistent disability or death up to 90 days after surgery. Secondary endpoints included major septic complications, hospital stay, and patient quality of recovery using a 15-item quality of recovery (QoR-15) score, hospital re-admissions, and disability-free survival up to 12 months after surgery. Anaemia and disability were defined according to the WHO definitions. Multivariable regression was used to adjust for baseline risk and surgery. RESULTS: A total of 2983 patients met inclusion criteria for this study, of which 78.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.7-80.1%) had postoperative anaemia. Patients with postoperative anaemia had a higher adjusted risk of death or disability up to 90 days after surgery when compared with those without anaemia: 18.2% vs 9.2% (risk ratio [RR]=1.51; 95% CI, 1.10-2.07, P=0.011); lower QoR-15 scores on Day 3 and Day 30, 105 (95% CI, 87-119) vs 114 (95% CI, 99-128; P<0.001), and 130 (95% CI, 112-140) vs 139 (95% CI, 121-144; P<0.011), respectively; higher adjusted risk of a composite of mortality/septic complications, 2.01 (95% CI, 1.55-42.67; P<0.001); unplanned admission to ICU (RR=2.65; 95% CI, 1.65-4.23; P<0.001); and longer median (inter-quartile range [IQR]) hospital stays, 6.6 (4.4-12.4) vs 3.7 (2.5-6.5) days (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative anaemia is common and is independently associated with poor outcomes after surgery. Optimal prevention and treatment strategies need to be investigated. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04978285 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Measurement of quality of recovery after surgery using the 15-item quality of recovery scale: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are very few patient-centred global outcome measures of recovery in the days or weeks after surgery. This meta-analysis evaluated the psychometric properties and clinical acceptability of the 15-item quality of recovery (QoR-15) scale. METHODS: We searched bibliographic databases for studies undertaking psychometric evaluation of the QoR-15 or using the QoR-15 as an outcome measure after surgery. Record screening, data extraction, and quality assessments were independently done by two researchers. Weighted averages estimating overall summary statistics across all the studies were calculated using random-effects meta-analysis. Pooled correlation coefficients were transformed using a Fisher z-transformation and then back-transformed to calculate pooled results. The four co-primary endpoints were validity, reliability, responsiveness, and clinical utility of the QoR-15 scale. RESULTS: A total of 26 unique studies met the eligibility criteria, yielding up to 22 847 patients across 16 countries, in 15 languages. A further 172 studies in a further 18 countries and six languages used the QoR-15 as an outcome measure. The QoR-15 had excellent discriminant validity, with the mean difference in QoR-15 scores in patients with and without postoperative complications (9.6; 95% confidence interval [CI], 5.9-13.3; P<0.001), and good convergent validity (for a global visual analogue recovery scale, pooled r=0.63; 95% CI, 0.54-0.71). There was excellent reliability: internal consistency (pooled α=0.85; 95% CI, 0.83-0.87), split-half reliability=0.80 (95% CI, 0.75-0.84), and test-retest reliability=0.97 (95% CI, 0.95-0.98). There was also high responsiveness (pooled standardised response mean=0.87; 95% CI, 0.65-1.08), patient recruitment into evaluation studies (96%; 95% CI, 93-99), and excellent completion and return rates (91%; 95% CI, 84-96). The mean time to complete the QoR-15 was 2.7 (95% CI, 2.2-3.1) min. CONCLUSIONS: The QoR-15 is a valid, reliable, and responsive patient-centred outcome metric in surgical patients. It is highly acceptable to both patients and clinicians. REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework Identifier: DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/78HTA.

Predicting recovery and disability after surgery in patients with severe obesity: The role of the six-minute walk test.

The most appropriate method to predict postoperative outcomes in patients with severe obesity undergoing elective non-bariatric surgery is not known. We conducted a single-centre prospective cohort study in patients with a body mass index of at least 35 kg/m2 undergoing non-bariatric, non-cardiac surgery. Patients completed the six-minute walk test prior to surgery. Disability was measured before and six months after surgery using the World Health Organization disability assessment schedule. Primary outcome measures included quality of recovery at one month and significantly increased disability at six months after surgery. A total of 293 patients participated. The median body mass index was 41 kg/m2. Patients generally recovered well. Following surgery, 9% of patients experienced a poor quality of recovery and 7% developed a significant increase in disability. The proportion of patients free from clinically significant disability increased from 66% prior to surgery to 90% at six months after surgery. The distance walked in six minutes was weakly predictive of poor recovery at one month and significantly increased disability at six months; weight and body mass index were not. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.65 (95% confidence intervals 0.51 to 0.78) for poor recovery and 0.64 (95% confidence intervals 0.51 to 0.77) for increased disability. A preoperative six-minute walk test distance of 308 m was the best cut-off value for predicting increased postoperative disability (sensitivity 0.68, specificity 0.63). The six-minute walk test was most discriminatory at shorter distances. This population of patients with severe obesity appeared to recover well and had few adverse outcomes. The degree of functional capacity was more important than the degree of obesity in predicting postoperative outcomes.

Postdischarge Functional Capacity, Health-Related Quality of Life, Depression, Anxiety, and Post-traumatic Stress Disorder in Patients Receiving a Long-term Left Ventricular Assist Device.

BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of data on depression, anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder after left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. We designed an observational study to integrate these with functional capacity and health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in surviving LVAD patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Consenting patients between 1 month and 9 years after LVAD implantation (n = 121) were screened for functional capacity (World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 [WHODAS 2.0)]); HR-QOL (European Quality of Life [EQ-5D] and Visual Assessment Scales [EQ-VAS]), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ-9], anxiety (Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale [GAD-7]) and post-traumatic stress disorder (Impact of Event Scale Revised [IES-R]). Of the 94% of patients who consented, 34.7% reported impaired functional capacity (WHODAS 2.0 score of ≥25%), 23.1%-34.7% HR-QOL problems (domain EQ-5D of ≥3), 10.7% "poor health" (EQ-VAS of ≤40), 14.9% depression (PHQ-9 of >14), 11.7% suicidal ideation and 17.5% anxiety (GAD-7 of >10). Among these patients, 23.5% had a positive screen for post-traumatic stress disorder (IES-R of ≥24). An EQ-VAS of 80 or greater predicted good functional capacity (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: One-third of discharged LVAD patients reported impaired function, HR-QOL, and psychological issues. A standardized evaluation before and after LVAD implantation could facilitate psychologic prehabilitation, inform decision-making, and identify indications for mental health intervention.

Association of six-minute walk test distance with postoperative complications in non-cardiac surgery: a secondary analysis of a multicentre prospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: The six-minute walk test (6MWT) is a simple and valid test for assessing cardiopulmonary fitness. Nevertheless, the relationship between preoperative 6MWT distance and postoperative complications is uncertain. We conducted a secondary analysis of the 6MWT nested cohort substudy of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery study to determine if 6MWT distance predicts postoperative complications or death. METHODS: This analysis included 545 adults (≥ 40 yr) who were at elevated cardiac risk and had elective inpatient non-cardiac surgery at 15 hospitals in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Each participant performed a preoperative 6MWT and was followed for 30 days after surgery. The primary outcome was moderate or severe in-hospital complications. The secondary outcome was 30-day death or myocardial injury. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to characterize the adjusted association of 6MWT distance with these outcomes. RESULTS: Seven participants (1%) terminated their 6MWT sessions early because of lower limb pain, dyspnea, or dizziness. Eighty-one (15%) participants experienced moderate or severe complications and 69 (13%) experienced 30-day myocardial injury or death. Decreased 6MWT distance was associated with increased odds of moderate or severe complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.32 per 100 m decrease; 95% confidence interval, 1.01 to 1.73; P = 0.045). There was no association of 6MWT distance with myocardial injury or 30-day death (non-linear association; P = 0.49). CONCLUSION: Preoperative 6MWT distance had a modest association with moderate or severe complications after inpatient non-cardiac surgery. Further studies are needed to determine the optimal role of the 6MWT as an objective exercise test for informing preoperative risk stratification.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Le test de marche de six minutes (6MWT) est un test simple et validé pour évaluer la santé cardiopulmonaire. Néanmoins, la relation entre la distance parcourue lors d'un 6MWT préopératoire et les complications postopératoires est inconnue. Nous avons effectué une analyse secondaire de la sous-étude de cohorte imbriquée du 6MWT dans l'étude de la Mesure de la tolérance à l'exercice avant chirurgie (Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery) afin de déterminer si la distance parcourue lors du 6MWT était prédictive de complications postopératoires ou de décès. MéTHODE: Cette analyse comprenait 545 adultes (≥ 40 ans) courant un risque cardiaque élevé et hospitalisés pour une chirurgie non cardiaque élective dans 15 hôpitaux au Canada, en Australie et en Nouvelle-Zélande. Chaque participant a exécuté un 6MWT préopératoire et a été suivi pendant 30 jours post chirurgie. Le critère d'évaluation principal touchait aux complications modérées ou graves à l'hôpital. Le critère secondaire était le décès à 30 jours ou une lésion myocardique. Un modèle de régression logistique multivariée a été employé pour caractériser l'association ajustée entre la distance parcourue lors du 6MWT et ces critères d'évaluation. RéSULTATS: Sept participants (1 %) n'ont pas terminé leurs séances de 6MWT en raison de douleurs aux membres inférieurs, de dyspnée ou de vertiges. Quatre-vingt-un (15 %) participants ont souffert de complications modérées ou graves et 69 (13 %) ont subi une lésion myocardique ou sont décédés à 30 jours. La diminution de la distance parcourue au 6MWT a été associée à une augmentation du risque de complications modérées ou graves (rapport de cotes ajusté, 1,32 par diminution de 100 m; intervalle de confiance 95 %, 1,01 à 1,73; P = 0,045). Aucune association n'a été observée entre la distance parcourue au 6MWT et la lésion myocardique ou le décès à 30 jours (association non linéaire; P = 0,49). CONCLUSION: La distance parcourue lors d'un 6MWT préopératoire a été modestement associée à des complications modérées ou graves après une chirurgie non cardiaque avec hospitalisation. D'autres études sont nécessaires pour déterminer le rôle optimal du 6MWT en tant que test d'exercice objectif pour informer la stratification préopératoire des risques.

Towards a national perioperative clinical quality registry: The diagnostic accuracy of administrative data in identifying major postoperative complications.

Accurately measuring the incidence of major postoperative complications is essential for funding and reimbursement of healthcare providers, for internal and external benchmarking of hospital performance and for valid and reliable public reporting of outcomes. Actual or surrogate outcomes data are typically obtained by one of three methods: clinical quality registries, clinical audit, or administrative data. In 2017 a perioperative registry was developed at the Alfred Hospital and mapped to administrative and clinical data. This study investigated the statistical agreement between administrative data (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (10th edition) Australian Modification codes) and clinical audit by anaesthetists in identifying major postoperative complications. The study population included 482 high-risk surgical patients referred to the Alfred Hospital anaesthesia postoperative service over two years. Clinical audit was conducted to determine the presence of major complications and these data were compared to administrative data. The main outcome was statistical agreement between the two methods, as defined by Cohen's kappa statistic. Substantial agreement was observed for five major complications, moderate agreement for three, fair agreement for six and poor agreement for two. Sensitivity and positive predictive value ranged from 0 to 100%. Specificity was above 90% for all complications. There was important variation in inter-rater agreement. For four of the five complications with substantial agreement between administrative data and clinical audit, sensitivity was only moderate (61.5%-75%). Using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems (10th edition) Australian Modification codes to identify postoperative complications at our hospital has high specificity but is likely to underestimate the incidence compared to clinical audit. Further, retrospective clinical audit itself is not a highly reliable method of identifying complications. We believe a perioperative clinical quality registry is necessary to validly and reliably measure major postoperative complications in Australia for benchmarking of hospital performance and before public reporting of outcomes should be considered.

Defining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference and Patient-acceptable Symptom State Score for Disability Assessment in Surgical Patients.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 has been used to measure postoperative disability in several clinical trials and cohort studies. It is uncertain what the minimal clinically important difference or patient-acceptable symptom state scores are for this scale in patients recovering from surgery. METHODS: The authors analyzed prospectively collected data from three studies that measured disability 3 and 6 months after surgery. Three distribution-based methods (0.3 multiplied by SD, standard error of the measurement, and 5% range) and two anchor-based methods (anchored to two patient-rated health status questions and separately to unplanned hospital readmission) were averaged to estimate the minimal clinically important difference for the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 score converted to a percentage scale. Scores consistent with a patient-acceptable symptom state and clinically significant disability were determined by an anchored 75th centile method. RESULTS: Data from 4,361 patients were analyzed. The average minimal clinically important difference estimate for the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 was 5%, with similar estimates in patients with or without preoperative disability. The patient-acceptable symptom state score was 16%, and the score consistent with at least moderate clinically significant disability was 35%. Using these estimates, between baseline and 6 months after surgery, 21% of patients had a significant increase in disability, and 73% achieved a patient-acceptable symptom state. CONCLUSIONS: A change in World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 score of 5% or more after surgery is consistent with a clinically important change in disability. Patients with a score less than 16% after surgery have an acceptable symptom state and can be considered as disability-free, whereas patients with a score of 35% or more can be considered as having at least moderate clinically significant disability.

Integration of the Duke Activity Status Index into preoperative risk evaluation: a multicentre prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The Duke Activity Status Index (DASI) questionnaire might help incorporate self-reported functional capacity into preoperative risk assessment. Nonetheless, prognostically important thresholds in DASI scores remain unclear. We conducted a nested cohort analysis of the Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study to characterise the association of preoperative DASI scores with postoperative death or complications. METHODS: The analysis included 1546 participants (≥40 yr of age) at an elevated cardiac risk who had inpatient noncardiac surgery. The primary outcome was 30-day death or myocardial injury. The secondary outcomes were 30-day death or myocardial infarction, in-hospital moderate-to-severe complications, and 1 yr death or new disability. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was used to characterise the adjusted association of preoperative DASI scores with outcomes. RESULTS: The DASI score had non-linear associations with outcomes. Self-reported functional capacity better than a DASI score of 34 was associated with reduced odds of 30-day death or myocardial injury (odds ratio: 0.97 per 1 point increase above 34; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.96-0.99) and 1 yr death or new disability (odds ratio: 0.96 per 1 point increase above 34; 95% CI: 0.92-0.99). Self-reported functional capacity worse than a DASI score of 34 was associated with increased odds of 30-day death or myocardial infarction (odds ratio: 1.05 per 1 point decrease below 34; 95% CI: 1.00-1.09), and moderate-to-severe complications (odds ratio: 1.03 per 1 point decrease below 34; 95% CI: 1.01-1.05). CONCLUSIONS: A DASI score of 34 represents a threshold for identifying patients at risk for myocardial injury, myocardial infarction, moderate-to-severe complications, and new disability.

Assessment of functional capacity before major non-cardiac surgery: an international, prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Functional capacity is an important component of risk assessment for major surgery. Doctors' clinical subjective assessment of patients' functional capacity has uncertain accuracy. We did a study to compare preoperative subjective assessment with alternative markers of fitness (cardiopulmonary exercise testing [CPET], scores on the Duke Activity Status Index [DASI] questionnaire, and serum N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide [NT pro-BNP] concentrations) for predicting death or complications after major elective non-cardiac surgery. METHODS: We did a multicentre, international, prospective cohort study at 25 hospitals: five in Canada, seven in the UK, ten in Australia, and three in New Zealand. We recruited adults aged at least 40 years who were scheduled for major non-cardiac surgery and deemed to have one or more risk factors for cardiac complications (eg, a history of heart failure, stroke, or diabetes) or coronary artery disease. Functional capacity was subjectively assessed in units of metabolic equivalents of tasks by the responsible anaesthesiologists in the preoperative assessment clinic, graded as poor (<4), moderate (4-10), or good (>10). All participants also completed the DASI questionnaire, underwent CPET to measure peak oxygen consumption, and had blood tests for measurement of NT pro-BNP concentrations. After surgery, patients had daily electrocardiograms and blood tests to measure troponin and creatinine concentrations until the third postoperative day or hospital discharge. The primary outcome was death or myocardial infarction within 30 days after surgery, assessed in all participants who underwent both CPET and surgery. Prognostic accuracy was assessed using logistic regression, receiver-operating-characteristic curves, and net risk reclassification. FINDINGS: Between March 1, 2013, and March 25, 2016, we included 1401 patients in the study. 28 (2%) of 1401 patients died or had a myocardial infarction within 30 days of surgery. Subjective assessment had 19·2% sensitivity (95% CI 14·2-25) and 94·7% specificity (93·2-95·9) for identifying the inability to attain four metabolic equivalents during CPET. Only DASI scores were associated with predicting the primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·83-0·99; p=0·03). INTERPRETATION: Subjectively assessed functional capacity should not be used for preoperative risk evaluation. Clinicians could instead consider a measure such as DASI for cardiac risk assessment. FUNDING: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, Ontario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science, UK National Institute of Academic Anaesthesia, UK Clinical Research Collaboration, Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists, and Monash University.

Validation of days at home as an outcome measure after surgery: a prospective cohort study in Australia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate 'days at home up to 30 days after surgery' (DAH30) as a patient-centred outcome measure. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. DATA SOURCE: Using clinical trial data (seven trials, 2109 patients) we calculated DAH30 from length of stay, readmission, discharge destination and death up to 30 days after surgery. MAIN OUTCOME: The association between DAH30 and serious complications after surgery. RESULTS: One or more complications occurred in 263 of 1846 (14.2%) patients, including 19 (1.0%) deaths within 30 days of surgery; 245 (11.6%) patients were discharged to a rehabilitation facility and 150 (7.1%) were readmitted to hospital within 30 days of surgery. The median DAH30 was significantly less in older patients (p<0.001), those with poorer physical functioning (p<0.001) and in those undergoing longer operations (p<0.001). Patients with serious complications had less days at home than patients without serious complications (20.5 (95% CI 19.1 to 21.9) vs 23.9 (95% CI 23.8 to 23.9) p<0.001), and had higher rates of readmission (16.0% vs 5.9%; p<0.001). After adjusting for patient age, sex, physical status and duration of surgery, the occurrence of postoperative complications was associated with fewer days at home after surgery (difference 3.0(95% CI 2.1 to 4.0) days; p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: DAH30 has construct validity and is a readily obtainable generic patient-centred outcome measure. It is a pragmatic outcome measure for perioperative clinical trials.

Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study: a protocol for an international multicentre prospective cohort study of cardiopulmonary exercise testing prior to major non-cardiac surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Preoperative functional capacity is considered an important risk factor for cardiovascular and other complications of major non-cardiac surgery. Nonetheless, the usual approach for estimating preoperative functional capacity, namely doctors' subjective assessment, may not accurately predict postoperative morbidity or mortality. 3 possible alternatives are cardiopulmonary exercise testing; the Duke Activity Status Index, a standardised questionnaire for estimating functional capacity; and the serum concentration of N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT pro-BNP), a biomarker for heart failure and cardiac ischaemia. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) Study is a multicentre prospective cohort study of patients undergoing major elective non-cardiac surgery at 25 participating study sites in Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the UK. We aim to recruit 1723 participants. Prior to surgery, participants undergo symptom-limited cardiopulmonary exercise testing on a cycle ergometer, complete the Duke Activity Status Index questionnaire, undergo blood sampling to measure serum NT pro-BNP concentration and have their functional capacity subjectively assessed by their responsible doctors. Participants are followed for 1 year after surgery to assess vital status, postoperative complications and general health utilities. The primary outcome is all-cause death or non-fatal myocardial infarction within 30 days after surgery, and the secondary outcome is all-cause death within 1 year after surgery. Both receiver-operating-characteristic curve methods and risk reclassification table methods will be used to compare the prognostic accuracy of preoperative subjective assessment, peak oxygen consumption during cardiopulmonary exercise testing, Duke Activity Status Index scores and serum NT pro-BNP concentration. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The METS Study has received research ethics board approval at all sites. Participant recruitment began in March 2013, and 1-year follow-up is expected to finish in 2016. Publication of the results of the METS Study is anticipated to occur in 2017.

Measurement of disability-free survival after surgery.

BACKGROUND: Survival and freedom from disability are arguably the most important patient-centered outcomes after surgery, but it is unclear how postoperative disability should be measured. The authors thus evaluated the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in a surgical population. METHODS: The authors examined the psychometric properties of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 in a diverse cohort of 510 surgical patients. The authors assessed clinical acceptability, validity, reliability, and responsiveness up to 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: Criterion and convergent validity of World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 were supported by good correlation with the 40-item quality of recovery scale at 30 days after surgery (r = -0.70) and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery with physical functioning (The Katz index of independence in Activities of Daily Living; r = -0.70, r = -0.60, and rho = -0.47); quality of life (EQ-5D; r = -0.57, -0.60, and -0.52); and pain interference scores (modified Brief Pain Inventory Short Form; r = 0.72, 0.74, and 0.81) (all P < 0.0005). Construct validity was supported by increased hospital stay (6.9 vs. 5.3 days, P = 0.008) and increased day 30 complications (20% vs. 11%, P = 0.042) in patients with new disability. There was excellent internal consistency with Cronbach's α and split-half coefficients greater than 0.90 at all time points (all P < 0.0005). Responsiveness was excellent with effect sizes of 3.4, 3.0, and 1.0 at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 is a clinically acceptable, valid, reliable, and responsive instrument for measuring postoperative disability in a diverse surgical population. Its use as an endpoint in future perioperative studies can provide outcome data that are meaningful to clinicians and patients alike.