Preoperative clinical characteristics and 12-month outcomes following operative or non-operative management of asymptomatic aortic aneurysms.

DESIGN: An observational cohort study conducted at a tertiary referral center for aortic surgery to describe the medical and surgical characteristics of patients assessed for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair and examine associations with 12-month outcome. METHODS: Patients with aortic aneurysms referred for discussion at the aortic multidisciplinary meeting (MDM). Data were collected via a prospectively maintained clinical database and included aneurysm characteristics, patient demographics, co-morbidities, geriatric syndromes, including frailty, management decision and 12-month mortality, both aneurysm-related and all-cause including cause of death. The operative and non-operative groups were compared statistically. RESULTS: 621 patients referred to aortic MDM; 292 patients listed for operative management, 141 patients continued on surveillance, 138 patients for non-operative management. There was a higher 12-month mortality rate in the non-operative group compared to the operative group (41% vs 7%, P = <0.001). In the non-operative group, 16 patients (29%) died of aneurysm rupture within 12 months, with 39 patients (71%) dying from other medical causes. Non-operatively managed patients were older, more likely to have cardiac and respiratory disease and more likely to be living with frailty, cognitive impairment and functional limitation, compared to the operative group. CONCLUSION: This study shows that preoperative geriatric syndromes and increased comorbidity lead to shared decision to non-operatively manage asymptomatic aortic aneurysms. Twelve-month mortality is higher in the non-operative group with the majority of deaths occurring due to cause other than aneurysm rupture. These findings support the need for preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment followed by multispecialty discussion and shared decision making.

A systematic review of perioperative clinical practice guidelines for care of older adults living with frailty.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative frailty is prevalent and requires complex management, which could be guided by clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). The objective of this systematic review was to identify and synthesise CPGs that provide perioperative recommendations specific to older adults living with frailty. METHODS: After protocol registration, we performed a systematic review of CPGs. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and 14 grey literature databases were searched (January 1, 2000 until December 22, 2021). We included all CPGs that contained at least one frailty-specific recommendation related to any phase of the perioperative period. We compiled all relevant recommendations, extracted underlying strength of evidence, and categorised them by perioperative phase of care. Within each phase, recommendations were synthesised inductively into themes. Quality of CPGs was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II instrument. RESULTS: From 4707 citations, 13 guidelines were included; 8/13 were focused on the perioperative care of older surgical patients in general. Among 110 recommendations extracted, 37 themes were generated, with the majority pertaining to preoperative care. Four themes were supported by strong evidence: performing preoperative frailty assessments, using multidimensional frailty instruments, reducing urinary catheter use, and following multidisciplinary care and communication throughout the perioperative period. Per AGREE II, most guidelines (8/13; 62%) were recommended for use with modifications. CONCLUSIONS: Despite increasing numbers of patients living with frailty, few guidelines exist that address frailty-specific perioperative care. Given the lack of strong evidence-based recommendations, particularly outside the preoperative period, high-quality primary research is required to underpin future guidelines and better inform the care of older surgical patients with frailty. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42022320149.

Implementing a perioperative care of older people undergoing surgery (POPS) service: findings from a multi-site qualitative implementation study.

BACKGROUND: The Perioperative care for Older People undergoing Surgery (POPS) service model is increasingly being implemented across care providers in the English and Welsh National Health Services. OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to produce evidence regarding clinical leaders' activities to implement POPS across different service contexts and to produce generalisable recommendations for future implementation. METHODS: A qualitative interview study was undertaken across six National Health Services hospitals with established POPS services. Interview participants were recruited on the basis of their direct involvement in the implementation and leadership of the service. Data collection involved semi-structured interviews with 26 people carried out between November 2022 and May 2023. RESULTS: The implementation of POPS is often hampered by a lack of managerial and financial support, and apprehension amongst surgeons and anaesthetist about new ways of working. POPS leaders address these through five interconnected activities, each targeted at a combination of implementation factors. (i) Securing management and financial support. (ii) Professional engagement. (iii) Evidence building as a resource for demonstrating the clinical and operational benefits of POPS. (iv) Communication and engagement activities to promote and legitimise POPS to stakeholder groups. (v) Designated and distributed leadership to promote and coordinate implementation activities and to spread the service to new pathways. CONCLUSIONS: Through a combination of activities POPS can be effectively implemented across different organisational contexts. Some aspects of these activities can be guided by shared resources and learning across sites, but others require adaption to local contextual barriers and drivers.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Consensus Guidelines for Emergency Laparotomy Part 3: Organizational Aspects and General Considerations for Management of the Emergency Laparotomy Patient.

BACKGROUND: This is Part 3 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy using an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses organizational aspects of care. METHODS: Experts in management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. RESULTS: Components of organizational aspects of care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi process. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on best current available evidence for organizational aspects of an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy and include discussion of less common aspects of care for the surgical patient, including end-of-life issues. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Consensus Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations Part 2-Emergency Laparotomy: Intra- and Postoperative Care.

BACKGROUND: This is Part 2 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL) using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses intra- and postoperative aspects of care. METHODS: Experts in aspects of management of high-risk and emergency general surgical patients were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Medline database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. Some ERAS® components covered in other guideline papers are outlined only briefly, with the bulk of the text focusing on key areas pertaining specifically to EL. RESULTS: Twenty-three components of intraoperative and postoperative care were defined. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi Process. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on best available evidence for an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing EL. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Perioperative care for older people.

Increasing numbers of older people are undergoing surgery with benefits including symptom relief and extended longevity. Despite these benefits, older people are more likely than younger patients to experience postoperative complications, which are predominantly medical as opposed to surgical. Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment and optimisation offers a systematic approach to risk assessment and risk modification in the perioperative period. Clinical evidence shows that Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment and optimisation reduces postoperative medical complications and is cost effective in the perioperative setting. These benefits have been observed in patients undergoing elective and emergency surgery. Challenges in the implementation of perioperative Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment and optimisation services are acknowledged. These include the necessary involvement of a wide stakeholder group, limited available geriatric medicine workforce and ensuring fidelity to Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment methodology with adaptation to the local context. Addressing these challenges needs a cross-specialty, interdisciplinary approach underpinned by evidence-based medicine and implementation science with upskilling to facilitate innovative use of the extended workforce. Future delivery of quality patient-centred perioperative care requires proactive engagement with national audit, collaborative guidelines and establishment of networks to share best practice.

New guidelines for the perioperative care of people living with frailty undergoing elective and emergency surgery-a commentary.

Frailty is common in the older population and is a predictor of adverse outcomes following emergency and elective surgery. Identification of frailty is key to enable targeted intervention throughout the perioperative pathway from contemplation of surgery to recovery. Despite evidence on how to identify and modify frailty, such interventions are not yet routine perioperative care. To address this implementation gap, a guideline was published in 2021 by the Centre for Perioperative Care and the British Geriatrics Society, working with patient representatives and all stakeholders involved in the perioperative care of patients with frailty undergoing surgery. The guideline covers all aspects of perioperative care relevant to adults living with frailty undergoing elective and emergency surgery. It is written for healthcare professionals, as well as for patients and their carers, managers and commissioners. Implementation of the guideline will require collaboration between all stakeholders, underpinned by an implementation strategy, workforce development with supporting education and training resources, and evaluation through national audit and research. The guideline is an important step in improving perioperative outcomes for people living with frailty and quality of healthcare services. This commentary provides a summary and discussion of the evidence informing the standards and recommendations in the published guideline.

Patient-reported outcome measures to evaluate postoperative quality of life in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: To appraise the measurement properties of generic patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) measuring postoperative quality of life in adults undergoing elective abdominal surgery. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review of PROMs administered after elective abdominal surgery. We systematically searched Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature database, and the Cochrane Library from earliest available dates to July 24, 2021, using relevant search terms. Articles were included if they reported assessment of measurement properties of a generic PROM/s measuring postoperative quality of life in adults who had undergone elective abdominal surgery. We used the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) Risk of Bias checklist to assess methodological quality. We synthesized the data and used the COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria to rate the certainty of evidence. RESULTS: Of 12,121 identified articles, nine articles assessing five PROMs (SF-6D, EQ-5D, SF-36, SF-12, PROMIS-10) met inclusion criteria. Measurement properties assessed included internal consistency (n = 2), construct validity (n = 5), and responsiveness (n = 8). Two PROMs had high quality evidence for a single measurement property each. The SF-6D demonstrated high quality evidence for responsiveness and the EQ-5D had high quality evidence for construct validity. CONCLUSION: There is insufficient evidence to support the choice of a specific generic PROM to evaluate quality of life following elective abdominal surgery. Clinicians and researchers should be aware of the current limitations in knowledge of the measurement properties of available PROMs.

Preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment and optimisation prior to elective arterial vascular surgery: a health economic analysis.

BACKGROUND: increasing numbers of older people are undergoing vascular surgery. Preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment and optimisation (CGA) reduces postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. Establishing CGA-based perioperative services requires health economic evaluation prior to implementation. Through a modelling-based economic evaluation, using data from a single site clinical trial, this study evaluates whether CGA is a cost-effective alternative to standard preoperative assessment for older patients undergoing elective arterial surgery. METHODS: an economic evaluation, using decision-analytic modelling, comparing preoperative CGA and optimisation with standard preoperative care, was undertaken in older patients undergoing elective arterial surgery. The incremental net health benefit of CGA, expressed in terms of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), was used to evaluate cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: CGA is a cost-effective substitute for standard preoperative care in elective arterial surgery across a range of cost-effectiveness threshold values. An incremental net benefit of 0.58 QALYs at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £30k, 0.60 QALYs at a threshold of £20k and 0.63 QALYs at a threshold of £13k was observed. Mean total pre- and postoperative health care utilisation costs were estimated to be £1,165 lower for CGA patients largely accounted for by reduced postoperative bed day utilisation. CONCLUSION: this study demonstrates a likely health economic benefit in addition to the previously described clinical benefit of employing CGA methodology in the preoperative setting in older patients undergoing arterial surgery. Further evaluation should examine whether CGA-based perioperative services can be effectively implemented and achieve the same clinical and health economic outcomes at scale.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations: Part 1-Preoperative: Diagnosis, Rapid Assessment and Optimization.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs for a large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach. METHODS: Experts in aspects of management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1-Preoperative Care and Part 2-Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1. RESULTS: Twelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients.

Older patients undergoing emergency laparotomy: observations from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) years 1-4.

BACKGROUND: older patients aged ≥65 years constitute the majority of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) population. To better understand this group and inform future service changes, this paper aims to describe patient characteristics, outcomes and process measures across age cohorts and temporally in the 4-year period (2014-2017) since NELA was established. METHODS: patient-level data were populated from the NELA data set years 1-4 and linked with Office of National Statistics mortality data. Descriptive data were compared between groups delineated by age, NELA year and geriatrician review. Primary outcomes were 30- and 90-day mortality, length of stay (LOS) and discharge to care-home accommodation. RESULTS: in total, 93,415 NELA patients were included in the analysis. The median age was 67 years. Patients aged ≥65 years had higher 30-day (15.3 versus 4.9%, P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (20.4 versus 7.2%, P < 0.001) rates, longer LOS (median 15.2 versus 11.3 days, P < 0.001) and greater likelihood of discharge to care-home accommodation compared with younger patients (6.7 versus 1.9%, P < 0.001). Mortality rate reduction over time was greater in older compared with younger patients. The proportion of older NELA patients seen by a geriatrician post-operatively increased over years 1-4 (8.5 to 16.5%, P < 0.001). Post-operative geriatrician review was associated with reduced mortality (30-day odds ratio [OR] 0.38, confidence interval [CI] 0.35-0.42, P < 0.001; 90-day OR 0.6, CI 0.56-0.65, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: older NELA patients have poorer post-operative outcomes. The greatest reduction in mortality rates over time were observed in the oldest cohorts. This may be due to several interventions including increased perioperative geriatrician input.

Measuring the distress related to delirium in older surgical patients and their relatives.

OBJECTIVES: Delirium is a common postoperative complication with implications on morbidity and mortality. Less is known about the psychological impact of delirium in patients and relatives. This study aimed to quantitatively describe distress related to postoperative delirium in older surgical patients and their relatives using the distress thermometer, examine the association between degree of distress and features of delirium on the Delirium Rating Scale (DRS), and examine the association between recall of delirium and features of delirium on the DRS. METHODS: This prospective study recruited postoperative patients and their relatives following delirium. The distress thermometer was used to examine the degree of distress pertaining to delirium and was conducted during the hospitalization on resolution of delirium and then at 12-month follow-up. Associations between delirium-related distress in patient and relative participants and severity and features of delirium (DRS) were examined. RESULTS: One hundred two patients and 49 relatives were recruited. Median scores on the distress thermometer in patients who recalled delirium were 8/10. Relatives also showed distress (median distress thermometer score of 8/10). Associations were observed between severity and phenotypic features of delirium (delusions, labile affect, and agitation). Distress persisted at 12 months in patients and relatives. CONCLUSION: Distress related to postoperative delirium can be measured using a distress thermometer. Alongside approaches to reduce delirium incidence, interventions to minimize distress from postoperative delirium should be sought. Such interventions should be developed through robust research and if effective administered to patients, relatives, or carers.

Where are we now in perioperative medicine? Results from a repeated UK survey of geriatric medicine delivered services for older people.

INTRODUCTION: national reports highlight deficiencies in the care of older patients undergoing surgery. A 2013 survey showed less than a third of NHS trusts had geriatrician-led perioperative medicine services for older surgical patients. Barriers to establishing services included funding, workforce and limited interspecialty collaboration. Since then, national initiatives have supported the expansion of geriatrician-led services for older surgical patients.This repeat survey describes geriatrician-led perioperative medicine services in comparison with 2013, exploring remaining barriers to developing perioperative medicine services for older patients. METHODS: an electronic survey was sent to clinical leads for geriatric medicine at 152 acute NHS healthcare trusts in the UK. Reminders were sent on four occasions over an 8-week period. The survey examined the nature of the services provided, extent of collaborative working and barriers to service development. Responses were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: eighty-one (53.3%) respondents provide geriatric medicine services for older surgical patients, compared to 38 (29.2%) in 2013. Services exist across surgical specialties, especially in orthopaedics and general surgery. Fourteen geriatrician-led preoperative clinics now exist. Perceived barriers to service development remain workforce issues and funding. Interspecialty collaboration has increased, evidenced by joint audit meetings (33% from 20.8%) and collaborative guideline development (31% from 17%). CONCLUSION: since 2013, an increase in whole-pathway geriatric medicine involvement is observed across surgical specialties. However, considerable variation persists across the UK with scope for wider adoption of services facilitated through a national network.

Evaluation and establishment of a ward-based geriatric liaison service for older urological surgical patients: Proactive care of Older People undergoing Surgery (POPS)-Urology.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of introducing and embedding a structured geriatric liaison service, Proactive care of Older People undergoing Surgery (POPS)-Urology, using comprehensive geriatric assessment methodology, on an inpatient urology ward. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A phased quality improvement project was undertaken using stepwise interventions. Phase 1 was a before-and-after study with initiation of a daily board round, weekly multidisciplinary meeting, and targeted geriatrician-led ward rounds for elective and emergency urology patients aged ≥65 years admitted over two 1-month periods. Outcomes were recorded from medical records and discharge documentation, including length of inpatient stay, medical and surgical complications, and 30-day readmission and mortality rates. Phase 2 was a quality improvement project involving Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles and qualitative staff surveys in order to create a Geriatric Surgical Checklist (GSCL) to standardize the intervention in Phase 1, improve equity of care by extending it to all ages, improve team-working and streamline handovers for multidisciplinary staff. RESULTS: Phase 1 included 112 patients in the control month and 130 in the intervention month. The length of inpatient stay was reduced by 19% (mean 4.9 vs 4.0 days; P = 0.01), total postoperative complications were lower (risk ratio 0.24 [95% confidence interval 0.10, 0.54]; P = 0.001). A non-significant trend was seen towards fewer cancellations of surgery (10 vs 5%; P = 0.12) and 30-day readmissions (8 vs 3%; P = 0.07). In Phase 2, the GSCL was created and incrementally improved. Questionnaires repeated at intervals showed that the GSCL helped staff to understand their role better in multidisciplinary meetings, improved their confidence to raise issues, reduced duplication of handovers and standardized identification of geriatric issues. Equity of care was improved by providing the intervention to patients of all ages, despite which the time taken for the daily board round did not lengthen. CONCLUSION: This is the first known paper describing the benefits of daily proactive geriatric intervention in elective and emergency urological surgery. The results suggest that using a multidisciplinary team board round helps to facilitate collaborative working between surgical and geriatric medicine teams. The GSCL enables systematic identification of patients who require a focused comprehensive geriatric assessment. There is potential to transfer the GSCL package to other surgical specialties and hospitals to improve postoperative outcomes.

The prevalence and impact of undiagnosed cognitive impairment in older vascular surgical patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this observational cohort study were to investigate the prevalence of undiagnosed cognitive impairment in older patients presenting for vascular surgery, to examine its association with adverse postoperative outcomes, and to test the feasibility of a preoperative cognitive assessment tool. METHODS: Patients aged 60 years or older were recruited by consent on admission to the vascular surgical ward of an inner-city teaching hospital with a large tertiary referral practice for proposed elective or emergency aortic or lower limb arterial intervention. Cognition was assessed preoperatively by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA), and a score below 24/30 indicated cognitive impairment or dementia. The mean length of time taken to complete the assessment was recorded. Baseline characteristics (medical multimorbidity, frailty, and laboratory tests), hospital length of stay (LOS), and postoperative complications were documented. RESULTS: Preoperative MoCA was completed in 114 patients with a mean age of 76.3 years (standard deviation, 7.36 years); 67.5% were men, and 55.3% of procedures were elective. The MoCA was completed in 100% of patients and was quick and acceptable to patients in this setting. Cognitive impairment or dementia was found in 68% of patients (77 of 114) and was previously unrecognized in 88.3% of patients (68 of 77). Therefore, 60.5% of patients (68 of 114) aged 60 years or older presenting for vascular surgery had previously undiagnosed cognitive impairment. MoCA <24 was univariately associated with pre-existing frailty (Edmonton Frail Scale [EFS] score ≥6.5) and longer LOS (≥12 days). In logistic regression modeling, MoCA <24 was strongly independently associated with frailty EFS score ≥6.5 (odds ratio, 12.55; P < .001). By use of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), MoCA <24 was predictive of longer LOS of ≥12 days (AUC, 0.621; P = .049). The strength of predictive power increased with the addition of frailty (EFS score ≥6.5) to the models (AUC, 0.695; P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of cognitive impairment among older patients presenting for vascular surgery is high and frequently undiagnosed before admission. It is feasible to use the MoCA to identify cognitive impairment in this high-risk surgical group preoperatively. The combined assessment of frailty and cognition is predictive of adverse postoperative outcomes and longer LOS.

Where are we in perioperative medicine for older surgical patients? A UK survey of geriatric medicine delivered services in surgery.

INTRODUCTION: national reports have highlighted deficiencies in care provided to older surgical patients and suggested a role for innovative, collaborative, inter-specialty models of care. The extent of geriatrician-led perioperative services in the UK (excluding orthogeriatric services) has not previously been described. This survey describes current services and explores barriers to further development. METHODS: an electronic survey was sent to clinical leads for geriatric medicine at all 161 acute NHS health care trusts in the UK. Reminders were sent on three occasions over an 8-week period. The survey examined preoperative and postoperative care and organisational issues. Responses were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: there were 130 respondents (80.7%). One-third (38) of respondents described providing some geriatric medicine input in older surgical patients. Preoperative services existed in 15 (12%), where 14 provided risk assessment and 13 preoperative optimisation. Twenty-six respondents (20%) delivered care postoperatively, of them 10 took a reactive approach, 11 a proactive approach and 5 provided a combination of reactive and proactive care. Barriers to establishing perioperative geriatric medicine services included funding, workforce issues and a lack of inter-specialty collaboration. CONCLUSION: a national appetite exists to provide geriatrician-led services to older surgical patients yet the majority of existing services remain reactive and do not use comprehensive geriatric assessment as an organising principle. This survey suggests that funding for geriatricians in perioperative care has not yet been universally established. Future efforts should focus on dissemination of experiential knowledge and published resources, collaboration with commissioners and empirical research to overcome the barriers described.

UK medical teaching about ageing is improving but there is still work to be done: the Second National Survey of Undergraduate Teaching in Ageing and Geriatric Medicine.

INTRODUCTION: in 2008, a UK national survey of undergraduate teaching about ageing and geriatric medicine identified deficiencies, including failure to adequately teach about elder abuse, pressure ulcers and bio- and social gerontology. We repeated the survey in 2013 to consider whether the situation had improved. METHOD: the deans of all 31 UK medical schools were invited to nominate a respondent with an overview of their undergraduate curriculum. Nominees were invited by email and letter to complete an online questionnaire quantifying topics taught, type of teaching and assessment undertaken, and the amount of time spent on teaching. RESULTS: one school only taught pre-clinical medicine and declined to participate. Of the 30 remaining schools, 20 responded and 19 provided analysable data. The majority of the schools (95-100%) provided teaching in delirium, dementia, stroke, falls, osteoporosis, extra-pyramidal disorders, polypharmacy, incontinence, ethics and mental capacity. Only 68% of the schools taught about elder abuse. Thirty-seven per cent taught a recognised classification of the domains of health used in Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA). The median (range) total time spent on teaching in ageing and geriatric medicine was 55.5 (26-192) h. There was less reliance on informal teaching and improved assessment:teaching ratios compared with the 2008 survey. CONCLUSIONS: there was an improvement in teaching and assessment of learning outcomes in ageing and geriatric medicine for UK undergraduates between 2008 and 2013. However, further work is needed to increase the amount of teaching time devoted to ageing and to improve teaching around elder abuse and the domains of health used in CGA.