Perioperative mortality risk score using pre- and postoperative risk factors in older patients.

We developed a risk score for 30-day postoperative mortality: the Perioperative Mortality risk score. We used a derivation cohort from a previous study of surgical patients aged 70 years or more at three large metropolitan teaching hospitals, using the significant risk factors for 30-day mortality from multivariate analysis. We summed the risk score for each of six factors creating an overall Perioperative Mortality score. We included 1012 patients and the 30-day mortality was 6%. The three preoperative factors and risk scores were ("three A's"): 1) age, years: 70 to 79 = 1, 80 to 89 = 3, 90+ = 6; 2) ASA physical status: ASA I or II = 0, ASA III = 3, ASA IV = 6, ASA V = 15; and 3) preoperative albumin < 30 g/l = 2.5. The three postoperative factors and risk scores were ("three I's") 1) unplanned intensive care unit admission = 4.0; 2) systemic inflammation = 3; and 3) acute renal impairment = 2.5. Scores and mortality were: < 5 = 1%, 5 to 9.5 = 7% and > or = 10 = 26%. We also used a preliminary validation cohort of 256 patients from a regional hospital. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (C-statistic) for the derivation cohort was 0.80 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.86) similar to the validation C-statistic: 0.79 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.88), P = 0.88. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test (P = 0.35) indicated good calibration in the validation cohort. The Perioperative Mortality score is straightforward and may assist progressive risk assessment and management during the perioperative period. Risk associated with surgical complexity and urgency could be added to this baseline patient factor Perioperative Mortality score.

Decreasing lengths of stay: the cost to the community.

BACKGROUND: Patients who are discharged earlier from hospital frequently require support from professional and unpaid carers at home after discharge. Hospitals save money per patient by discharging earlier, but it is not known whether the costs to community services and unpaid caters outweigh the savings to the hospital. METHODS: We prospectively studied the total costs, patient satisfaction, time off work and pain scores of 224 patients who underwent elective herniorrhaphy or laparoscopic cholecystectomy and who lived locally before and after re-engineering the elective surgical service. The components of the re-engineered surgical service were a peri-operative unit, pre-admission anaesthetic assessment based on self-reported questionnaires, day of surgery admissions, enhanced patient education, clinical pathways, and post-acute care. RESULTS: The patients treated through the re-engineered surgical service had a significantly shorter length of stay (LOS) (mean LOS: 2.2 vs 3.2 days; P < 0.001) but neither they nor their carers required more time off work. Significant determinants of time off work were smoking, heavy lifting at work and a higher pain score at day 7. Patients treated through the re-engineered surgical service recorded significantly higher satisfaction with their treatment. The cost saving to the hospital outweighed the cost of increased services provided in the community, so that the overall cost of providing treatment was over $200 less per patient through the re-engineered service. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that changes in care provision that result in shorter LOS and greater cost effectiveness may better meet patients' needs than existing systems.

Re-engineering the elective surgical service of a tertiary hospital: a historical controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To study the clinical effects of re-engineering the processes associated with elective surgery. DESIGN: A prospective, historical controlled trial. Control patients were enrolled from March 1995 to January 1996, and postintervention patients from February 1996 to October 1996. SETTING: A major teaching, tertiary care hospital (Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney). PATIENTS: 224 patients (123 before and 101 after the intervention) undergoing elective herniorrhaphy of laparoscopic cholecystectomy who lived in the local area. INTERVENTION: Introduction of a re-engineered surgical service consisting of preadmission assessment and education, admission on day of surgery, and postacute care after discharge. There were no changes to the operative methods or infection control procedures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Length of stay, operative complications, pain scores and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The risk of a patient suffering one or more complications was reduced in the postintervention group (postintervention v. control patients: 25.7% v. 38.2%; relative risk [RR], 0.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44-0.98; P = 0.035) because of a reduced risk of wound infections (5.0% v. 16.3%; RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.12-0.78; P = 0.0075). Other complications (perioperative or postoperative) and pain scores were unchanged. Patients treated by the re-engineered service had a significantly shorter length of stay, reported a higher level of satisfaction with the preoperative and postdischarge care, and were more likely to say that they would have the same treatment again (92.9% v 82.6%; P = 0.037). CONCLUSIONS: Re-engineering surgical services, with an associated reduction in length of stay, does not lead to a deterioration in care and may decrease postoperative complications and increase patient satisfaction.

Alterations in endotracheal tube position during general anaesthesia.

The effect of head and neck movement and Trendelenburg tilt on endotracheal tube position, relative to the carina, was studied in fifty adult patients requiring intubation for elective surgery. On average, inward movement, that is shortening of the distance between the endotracheal tube tip and the carina, resulted from neck flexion (mean = -5.5 mm), whereas outward movement occurred with neck extension (mean = 6.3 mm). Neck rotation, to right and left, and Trendelenburg tilt did not show any trend towards inward nor outward movement (mean = 0.3 mm/1.7 mm/-0.6 mm, respectively). Whilst these mean positional changes for flexion and extension confirm the findings of earlier investigations, our range of maximum inward and outward displacement for flexion (23 mm in/19 mm out), extension (21 mm in/33 mm out), rotation to right (19 mm in/17 mm out), to left (22 mm in/19 mm out) and Trendelenburg tilt (22 mm in/16 mm out) indicate that for any given postural change in any one patient, the direction and magnitude of endotracheal tube displacement is not readily predictable.