Can we let our patients sleep in the hospital? A randomized controlled trial of a pragmatic sleep protocol in surgical oncology patients.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative inpatients experience increased stress due to pain and poor restorative sleep than non-surgical inpatients. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: A total of 101 patients, undergoing major oncologic surgery, were randomized to a postoperative sleep protocol (n = 50) or standard postoperative care (n = 51), between August 2020 and November 2021. The primary endpoint of the study was postoperative sleep time after major oncologic surgery. Sleep time and steps were measured using a Fitbit Charge 4®. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference found in postoperative sleep time between the sleep protocol and standard group (median sleep time of 427 min vs. 402 min; p = 0.852, respectively). Major complication rates were similar in both groups (7.4% vs. 8.9%). Multivariate analysis found sex and Charlson Comorbidity Index to be significant factors affecting postoperative sleep time and step count. Postoperative delirium was only observed in the standard group, although this did not reach statistical significance. There were no in hospital mortalities. CONCLUSION: The use of a sleep protocol was found to be safe in our study population. There was no statistical difference in postoperative sleep time or major complications. Institution of a more humane sleep protocol for postoperative inpatients should be considered.

Apixaban for Extended Thromboprophylaxis After Oncologic Resection: Outcomes and Cost Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing oncologic resection are at risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), and this can lead to increased morbidity and hospital costs. Low-molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is recommended as extended thromboprophylaxis (ETP) in high-risk patients and has been shown to reduce rates of VTE. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of consecutive patients undergoing resection for oncologic indications at a single institution from May 2016 to May 2019. This study evaluated the use of apixaban as ETP at discharge. The primary outcomes were deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), or mesenteric/portal venous thromboembolism at 30, 60, and 90 days postoperatively. RESULTS: A total of 600 patients were included; 449 patients received no ETP, and 151 patients received apixaban. PE occurred in 1.1, 1.6, and 2.3% of patients without ETP and 0, 0, and .7% of patients in the apixaban group (at 30, 60, and 90 days; P = .338, P = .201, and P = .306, respectively). DVT occurred in 1.8, 2.1, and 2.8% of patients without ETP and 0, 0, and 1.4% in the apixaban group (P = .211, P = .121, and P = .535, respectively). The total cost, including ETP and readmission for VTE, per patient was US $5.51 more in the apixaban group. CONCLUSION: Apixaban therapy for ETP did not produce a statistically significant reduction in VTE events in our patients. Future studies should include more patients in a prospective multicenter trial.

Do Common Marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) Use Scent to Communicate Information about Food Resources?

Many animals use olfactory cues to signal information about food resources; however, this particular use of scent has received little attention in primates. Common marmosets (Callithrix jacchus) are exudativores that gouge bark to elicit exudate production and frequently deposit scent marks at gouge holes. We conducted preliminary tests of the hypothesis that common marmosets use olfactory cues to communicate information about exudate value, with more desirable resources targeted for marking. We performed choice experiments on two captive male marmosets. The animals were presented with: (1) a urine scent-marked and unmarked food resource, and (2) a high and low value food resource (i.e., greater/lesser food volumes). Marmosets placed more scent marks on high, compared to low, value food resources. Animals also spent more time gouging, removed more bark and more frequently revisited high versus low value food resources. Lastly, scent-marked foods were gouged more often than unmarked foods. Our findings support the hypothesis that marmosets use scent marking and olfaction to convey information about food resources, although verification in a larger sample is needed. Nonetheless, the demonstrated link between food value and scent marking suggests that olfactory signals may aid marmoset foraging decisions.