Incidence and risk factors of peri-operative stroke in major non-cardiovascular, non-neurologic surgery-A retrospective register-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Peri-operative stroke is a rare but serious surgical complication. Both overt and covert stroke, occurring in approximately 0.1% and 7% of cases, respectively, are associated with significant long-term effects and increased morbidity. METHODS: Retrospective register data for patients >18 years old, presenting for major non-cardiovascular, non-neurosurgical and non-ambulatory surgical procedures at 23 hospitals in Sweden between 2007 and 2014 was collected and linked with various quality registers. The primary outcome was stroke within 30 days from surgery. Using multivariable logistic regression, significant independent risk factors influencing the primary outcome were identified and their adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. Mortality was assessed, along with the composite score of days alive and at home within 30 days after surgery (DAH 30). RESULTS: In total, 318,017 patients were included, with 687 (0.22%) suffering a stroke within 30 days of surgery. The strongest significant risk factors included: increasing ASA-class (OR [95% confidence interval, CI]: 2.23 [1.53-3.36], 3.91 [2.68-5.93] and 7.82 [5.03-12.5] for ASA 2, 3 and 4, respectively) and age (OR [95% CI]: 4.47 [2.21-10.3], 9.9 [5.15-22.1], 16.3 [8.48-36.5] and 21 [10.6-48.1], for age 45-59, 60-74, 75-89 and >90, respectively), along with non-elective procedures, male gender and a history of cerebrovascular disease (OR [95%]: 2.72 [2.25-3.27]). Mortality was increased and DAH 30 was reduced in patients suffering a stroke. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing ASA-class and age was clearly associated with an increased risk of peri-operative stroke, which in turn was associated with increased mortality and poorer outcome. Detailed pre-operative risk stratification and individualised peri-operative management could potentially improve patient-centred outcomes and, in turn, have positive implications for public health.

Systematic development and validation of a predictive model for major postoperative complications in the Peri-operative Quality Improvement Project (PQIP) dataset.

Complications are common following major surgery and are associated with increased use of healthcare resources, disability and mortality. Continued reliance on mortality estimates risks harming patients and health systems, but existing tools for predicting complications are unwieldy and inaccurate. We aimed to systematically construct an accurate pre-operative model for predicting major postoperative complications; compare its performance against existing tools; and identify sources of inaccuracy in predictive models more generally. Complete patient records from the UK Peri-operative Quality Improvement Programme dataset were analysed. Major complications were defined as Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ 2 for novel models. In a 75% train:25% test split cohort, we developed a pipeline of increasingly complex models, prioritising pre-operative predictors using Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operators (LASSO). We defined the best model in the training cohort by the lowest Akaike's information criterion, balancing accuracy and simplicity. Of the 24,983 included cases, 6389 (25.6%) patients developed major complications. Potentially modifiable risk factors (pain, reduced mobility and smoking) were retained. The best-performing model was highly complex, specifying individual hospital complication rates and 11 patient covariates. This novel model showed substantially superior performance over generic and specific prediction models and scores. We have developed a novel complications model with good internal accuracy, re-prioritised predictor variables and identified hospital-level variation as an important, but overlooked, source of inaccuracy in existing tools. The complexity of the best-performing model does, however, highlight the need for a step-change in clinical risk prediction to automate the delivery of informative risk estimates in clinical systems.

Potential for using simulated altitude as a means of prehabilitation: a physiology study.

The current pandemic of surgical complications necessitates urgent and pragmatic innovation to reduce postoperative morbidity and mortality, which are associated with poor pre-operative fitness and anaemia. Exercise prehabilitation is a compelling strategy, but it has proven difficult to establish that it improves outcomes either in isolation or as part of a multimodal approach. Simulated altitude exposure improves performance in athletes and offers a novel potential means of improving cardiorespiratory and metabolic fitness and alleviating anaemia within the prehabilitation window. We aimed to provide an initial physiological foundation for 'altitude prehabilitation' by determining the physiological effects of one week of simulated altitude (FI O2 15%, equivalent to approximately 2438 m (8000 ft)) in older sedentary volunteers. The study used a randomised, double-blind, sham-controlled crossover design. Eight participants spent counterbalanced normoxic and hypoxic weeks in a residential hypoxia facility and underwent repeated cardiopulmonary exercise tests. Mean (SD) age of participants was 64 (7) y and they were unfit, with mean (SD) baseline anaerobic threshold 12 (2) ml.kg-1 .min-1 and mean (SD) peak V̇O2 15 (3) ml.kg-1 .min-1 . Hypoxia was mild (mean (SD) Sp O2 93 (2) %, p < 0.001) and well-tolerated. Despite some indication of greater peak exercise capacity following hypoxia, overall there was no effect of simulated altitude on anaerobic threshold or peak V̇O2 . However, hypoxia induced a substantial increase in mean (SD) haemoglobin of 1.5 (2.7) g.dl-1 (13% increase, p = 0.028). This study has established the concept and feasibility of 'altitude prehabilitation' and demonstrated specific potential for improving haematological fitness. Physiologically, there is value in exploring a possible role for simulated altitude in pre-operative optimisation.

Olanzapine as an add-on, pre-operative anti-emetic drug for postoperative nausea or vomiting: a randomised controlled trial.

Postoperative nausea or vomiting occurs in up to 40% in patients with multiple risk factors, despite prophylaxis. Olanzapine is an antipsychotic drug that is used to prevent nausea and vomiting in palliative care and to treat chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. This study aimed to examine whether pre-operative olanzapine, as a prophylactic anti-emetic added to intra-operative dexamethasone, ondansetron and total intravenous anaesthesia, reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting. We performed a multiply-blinded randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18-60 years with cancer at high risk of postoperative nausea or vomiting (three or four risk factors according to the Apfel criteria) plus a previous history of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Patients were allocated at random to receive 10 mg olanzapine or placebo orally 1 h before surgery in addition to a two-drug regimen (dexamethasone and ondansetron) and propofol anaesthesia to prevent postoperative nausea or vomiting. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 h after surgery. In total, 100 patients were enrolled; 47 in the olanzapine group and 49 in the control group completed the study. The baseline characteristics of the groups were similar. The incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 h after surgery was lower in the olanzapine group (12/47, 26%) than in the control group (31/49, 63%) (p = 0.008, RR 0.40 (95%CI 0.21-0.79)). Adding pre-operative oral olanzapine to intra-operative dexamethasone and ondansetron was highly effective in reducing the risk of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 hours after surgery in patients with a previous history of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and at least three Apfel risk factors for postoperative nausea or vomiting.

Pain Control for Sickle Cell Crisis, a Novel Approach? A Retrospective Study.

Background and Objectives: Pain management poses a significant challenge for patients experiencing vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC) in sickle cell disease (SCD). While opioid therapy is highly effective, its efficacy can be impeded by undesirable side effects. Local regional anesthesia (LRA), involving the deposition of a perineural anesthetic, provides a nociceptive blockade, local vasodilation and reduces the inflammatory response. However, the effectiveness of this therapeutic approach for VOC in SCD patients has been rarely reported up to now. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a single-shot local regional anesthesia (LRA) in reducing pain and consequently enhancing the management of severe vaso-occlusive crisis (VOC) in adults with sickle cell disease (SCD) unresponsive to conventional analgesic therapy. Materials and Methods: We first collected consecutive episodes of VOC in critical care (ICU and emergency room) for six months in 2022 in a French University hospital with a large population of sickle cell patients in the West Indies population. We also performed a systematic review of the use of LRA in SCD. The primary outcome was defined using a numeric pain score (NPS) and/or percentage of change in opioid use. Results: We enrolled nine SCD adults (28 years old, 4 females) for ten episodes of VOC in whom LRA was used for pain management. Opioid reduction within the first 24 h post block was -75% (50 to 96%). Similarly, the NPS decreased from 9/10 pre-block to 0-1/10 post-block. Five studies, including one case series with three patients and four case reports, employed peripheral nerve blocks for regional anesthesia. In general, local regional anesthesia (LRA) exhibited a reduction in pain and symptoms, along with a decrease in opioid consumption post-procedure. Conclusions: LRA improves pain scores, reduces opioid consumption in SCD patients with refractory pain, and may mitigate opioid-related side effects while facilitating the transition to oral analgesics. Furthermore, LRA is a safe and effective procedure.

Editor's Choice - The Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Get Fit Trial: A Randomised Controlled Trial of Exercise to Improve Fitness in Patients with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm.

OBJECTIVE: Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) carries a mortality rate of up to 80%. Elective repair prevents rupture, but peri-operative mortality remains at 2% - 3%. This mortality rate and long term survival rate are associated with impaired peak oxygen uptake (peak VO2), oxygen uptake at anaerobic threshold (AT) and ventilatory equivalent for CO2 (VECO2) at AT on cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET). Improving fitness to optimise these variables could improve peri-operative and long term survival, but the required exercise training suitable for patients with AAA has yet to be established. This randomised controlled trial aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of 24 week, patient directed, community based exercise on CPET measured fitness in AAA surveillance patients. METHODS: This was a prospective randomised controlled trial in a tertiary UK vascular centre conducted using CONSORT guidelines. Patients on AAA surveillance (n = 56) were randomly assigned to either (1) a 24 week community exercise programme (CEP) with choice of gym or home exercises, or (2) standard clinical care including advice on weight loss and exercise. The primary outcome was change in peak VO2 at 24 weeks, with secondary outcomes including AT, VECO2, cardiovascular biomarkers (lipid profile, pro-B-type natriuretic peptide, and high sensitivity C reactive protein, body mass index, and HRQoL. Follow up was at eight, 16, 24, and 36 weeks to evaluate duration of benefit. All analyses were performed on an intention to treat basis. RESULTS: CEP patients (n = 28) achieved mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) improvements from baseline in peak VO2 of 1.5 (95% CI 0.5 - 2.5), 2.1 (95% CI 1.1 - 3.2), 2.3 (95% CI 1.2 - 3.3), and 2.2 (95% CI 1.1, 3.3) mL/kg/min at 8, 16, 24, and 36 weeks, respectively. These changes in CEP patients were significantly greater than those seen in control patients at 16 (p = .002), 24 (p = .031), and 36 weeks (p < .001). There were also significant improvements in AT, triglyceride levels, and HRQoL in CEP patients. CONCLUSION: This CEP significantly improved those CPET parameters associated with impaired peri-operative and long term survival in patients following AAA repair. These improvements were maintained at 12 weeks following the end of the programme.

Change in healthcare utilisation after surgical treatment: observational study of routinely collected patient data from primary and secondary care.

BACKGROUND: Most patients fully recover after surgery. However, high-risk patients may experience an increased burden of medical disease. METHODS: We performed a prospectively planned analysis of linked routine primary and secondary care data describing adult patients undergoing non-obstetric surgery at four hospitals in East London between January 2012 and January 2017. We categorised patients by 90-day mortality risk using logistic regression modelling. We calculated healthcare contact days per patient year during the 2 yr before and after surgery, and express change using rate ratios (RaR) with 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: We included 70 021 patients, aged (mean [standard deviation, sd]) 49.8 (19) yr, with 1238 deaths within 2 yr after surgery (1.8%). Most procedures were elective (51 693, 74.0%), and 20 441 patients (29.1%) were in the most deprived national quintile for social deprivation. Elective patients had 12.7 healthcare contact days per patient year before surgery, increasing to 15.5 days in the 2 yr after surgery (RaR, 1.22 [1.21-1.22]), and those at high-risk of 90-day mortality (11% of population accounting for 80% of all deaths) had the largest increase (37.0 days per patient year before vs 60.8 days after surgery; RaR, 1.64 [1.63-1.65]). Emergency patients had greater increases in healthcare burden (13.8 days per patient year before vs 24.8 days after surgery; RaR, 1.8 [1.8-1.8]), particularly in high-risk patients (28% of patients accounting for 80% of all deaths by day 90), with 21.6 days per patient year before vs 49.2 days after surgery; RaR, 2.28 [2.26-2.29]. DISCUSSION: High-risk patients who survive the immediate perioperative period experience large and persistent increases in healthcare utilisation in the years after surgery. The full implications of this require further study.

Chronic subdural haematoma: the role of peri-operative medicine in a common form of reversible brain injury.

Epidemiological studies project a significant rise in cases of chronic subdural haematoma over the next 20 years. Patients with this condition are frequently older and medically complex, with baseline characteristics that may increase peri-operative risk. The intra-operative period is only a small portion of a patient's total hospital stay, with a majority of patients in the United Kingdom transferred between institutions for their surgical and rehabilitative care. Definitive management remains surgical, but peri-operative challenges exist which resonate with other surgical cohorts where multidisciplinary working has become the gold standard. These include shared decision-making, medical optimisation, the management of peri-operative anticoagulation and the identification of key points of equipoise for examination in the future trials. In this narrative review, we use a stereotyped patient journey to provide context to the recent literature, highlighting where multidisciplinary expertise may be required to optimise patient care and maximise the benefits of surgical management. We discuss the triage, pre-operative optimisation, intra-operative management and immediate postoperative care of patients undergoing surgery for a chronic subdural haematoma. We also discuss where adjunctive medical management may be indicated. In so doing, we present the current and emerging evidence base for the role of an integrated peri-operative medicine team in the care of patients with a chronic subdural haematoma.

Evidence-based strategies to reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium: a narrative review.

Delirium is one of the most commonly occurring postoperative complications in older adults. It occurs due to the vulnerability of cerebral functioning to pathophysiological stressors. Identification of those at increased risk of developing delirium early in the surgical pathway provides an opportunity for modification of predisposing and precipitating risk factors and effective shared decision-making. No single delirium prediction tool is used widely in surgical settings. Multi-component interventions to prevent delirium involve structured risk factor modification supported by geriatrician input; these are clinically efficacious and cost effective. Barriers to the widespread implementation of such complex interventions exist, resulting in an 'implementation gap'. There is a lack of evidence for pharmacological prophylaxis for the prevention of delirium. Current evidence suggests that avoidance of peri-operative benzodiazepines, careful titration of anaesthetic depth guided by processed electroencephalogram monitoring and treatment of pain are the most effective strategies to minimise the risk of delirium. Addressing postoperative delirium requires a collaborative, whole pathway approach, beginning with the early identification of those patients who are at risk. The research agenda should continue to examine the potential for pharmacological prophylaxis to prevent delirium while also addressing how successful models of delirium prevention can be translated from one setting to another, underpinned by implementation science methodology.

The impact of COVID-19 on anaesthesia and critical care services in the UK: a serial service evaluation.

Between October 2020 and January 2021, we conducted three national surveys to track anaesthetic, surgical and critical care activity during the second COVID-19 pandemic wave in the UK. We surveyed all NHS hospitals where surgery is undertaken. Response rates, by round, were 64%, 56% and 51%. Despite important regional variations, the surveys showed increasing systemic pressure on anaesthetic and peri-operative services due to the need to support critical care pandemic demands. During Rounds 1 and 2, approximately one in eight anaesthetic staff were not available for anaesthetic work. Approximately one in five operating theatres were closed and activity fell in those that were open. Some mitigation was achieved by relocation of surgical activity to other locations. Approximately one-quarter of all surgical activity was lost, with paediatric and non-cancer surgery most impacted. During January 2021, the system was largely overwhelmed. Almost one-third of anaesthesia staff were unavailable, 42% of operating theatres were closed, national surgical activity reduced to less than half, including reduced cancer and emergency surgery. Redeployed anaesthesia staff increased the critical care workforce by 125%. Three-quarters of critical care units were so expanded that planned surgery could not be safely resumed. At all times, the greatest resource limitation was staff. Due to lower response rates from the most pressed regions and hospitals, these results may underestimate the true impact. These findings have important implications for understanding what has happened during the COVID-19 pandemic, planning recovery and building a system that will better respond to future waves or new epidemics.

The role of regional anaesthesia in the emerging subspecialty of onco-anaesthesia: a state-of-the-art review.

Cancer accounts for millions of deaths globally each year, predominantly due to recurrence and metastatic disease. The majority of patients with primary solid organ cancers require surgery, however, some degree of tumour dissemination related to surgery is inevitable. The surgical stress response and associated immunosuppression, pain, inflammation, tissue hypoxia and angiogenesis have all been implicated in promoting tumour survival, proliferation and recurrence. Regional anaesthesia was hypothesised to reduce the surgical stress response and immunosuppression, minimise the need for volatile anaesthesia and reduce pain and opioid requirements, thus mitigating pro-tumour pathways associated with the peri-operative period and improving long-term oncological outcomes. While some retrospective studies suggested an association between regional anaesthesia and reduced cancer recurrence, the first large randomised controlled trial on the effect of anaesthetic technique on cancer outcome found no significant difference between paravertebral regional anaesthesia and volatile anaesthesia with opioid analgesia in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Randomised controlled trials on the long-term oncological outcomes of regional anaesthesia in other tumour types are ongoing. The focus on how peri-operative interventions, especially regional anaesthesia, during cancer resection surgery, may enhance short-term recovery and perhaps influence long-term outcome has spawned the global emergence of the subspecialty of onco-anaesthesia. This review aims to discuss the most recent evidence on the use of regional anaesthesia in cancer surgery and the significance of its role in onco-anaesthesia.

Development and evaluation of a novel pre-operative surgery school and behavioural change intervention for patients undergoing elective major surgery: Fit-4-Surgery School.

Group pre-operative education has usually been limited to conditioning expectations and providing education. Prehabilitation has highlighted modifiable lifestyle factors that are amenable to change and may improve clinical outcomes. We instituted a pre-operative 'Fit-4-Surgery School' for patients scheduled for major surgery, to educate and promote healthy behaviour. We evaluated patients' views having attended the school, and after surgery we asked how it had changed their behaviour with a lifestyle questionnaire. The school was launched in May 2016 and was attended by 586/1017 (58%) of invited patients. Patients who did not attend: lived further away, median (IQR [range]) 8 (4-19 [0-123]) miles vs. 5 (3-14 [0-172]) miles, p < 0.001; and were more deprived, Index of Multiple Deprivation Rank decile median (IQR [range]), 6 (4-8 [1-10]) vs. 7 (4-9 [1-10]), p = 0.04. Of the 492/586 (84%) participants who completed an evaluation questionnaire, 462 (94%) would recommend the school to a friend having surgery and 296 (60%) planned lifestyle changes. After surgery, 232/586 (40%) completed a behavioural change questionnaire, 106 (46%) of whom reported changing at least one lifestyle factor, most commonly by increasing exercise. The pre-operative school was acceptable to patients.

Pre-operative optimisation for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a narrative review.

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease is a condition commonly present in older people undergoing surgery and confers an increased risk of postoperative complications and mortality. Although predominantly a respiratory disease, it frequently has extra-pulmonary manifestations and typically occurs in the context of other long-term conditions. Patients experience a range of symptoms that affect their quality of life, functional ability and clinical outcomes. In this review, we discuss the evidence for techniques to optimise the care of people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the peri-operative period, and address potential new interventions to improve outcomes. The article centres on pulmonary rehabilitation, widely available for the treatment of stable chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, but less often used in a peri-operative setting. Current evidence is largely at high risk of bias, however. Before surgery it is important to ensure that what have been called the 'five fundamentals' of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease treatment are achieved: smoking cessation; pulmonary rehabilitation; vaccination; self-management; and identification and optimisation of co-morbidities. Pharmacological treatment should also be optimised, and some patients may benefit from lung volume reduction surgery. Psychological and behavioural factors are important, but are currently poorly understood in the peri-operative period. Considerations of the risk and benefits of delaying surgery to ensure the recommended measures are delivered depends on patient characteristics and the nature and urgency of the planned intervention.

More than just morbidity and mortality - quality of recovery and long-term functional recovery after surgery.

Traditional surgical outcome measures include minor and major complications, hospital length of stay and sometimes longer-term survival. Each of these is important but there needs to be greater emphasis on patient-reported outcome measures. Global measures of a patient's quality of recovery, avoidance of postoperative morbidities, early hospital discharge to home (without re-admission) and longer term disability-free survival can better define postoperative recovery. A patient's recovery pathway can be mapped through the immediate days or weeks after surgery with documentation of morbidity using the postoperative morbidity survey and/or a quality of recovery score, days alive and at home up to 30 days after surgery and then longer term disability-free survival using the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 scale. These can be used to define quality of recovery after surgery.

Impact of a risk-stratified thromboprophylaxis protocol on the incidence of postoperative venous thromboembolism and bleeding.

Efforts to reduce postoperative venous thromboembolism are challenging due to heterogeneity in thromboprophylaxis practice. As a result, a 'one-size-fits-all' approach that accounts for surgery-specific risk, but fails to account for patient-level variation, is often adopted by healthcare networks. Updated clinical practice guidelines have advocated an individualised risk-stratified approach that balances the risk:benefit ratio associated with thromboprophylaxis; however, there are limited data confirming effectiveness of these recommendations on the incidence of postoperative venous thromboembolism and bleeding. We developed the surgical-thrombo-embolism-prevention protocol, a novel risk-stratified algorithm that classified patients into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk profiles according to surgical procedure and patient baseline medical risk. Expert-endorsed risk-specific thromboprophylaxis strategies were then applied. A staged quality improvement program was developed to implement the protocol. We postulated that compliance with the protocol would reduce postoperative venous thromboembolism rates without increasing the incidence of postoperative bleeding. Between June 2013 and March 2018, we evaluated the efficacy, safety and sustainability of this risk-stratified approach in 24,953 surgical admissions at a dedicated cancer centre. By final implementation, program compliance was 91%. Postoperative venous thromboembolism rates reduced from 3.1 per 1000 surgical admissions to 0.6 per 1000 surgical admissions (relative risk reduction 79%; p < 0.005). Postoperative bleeding rates also declined from 10.0 per 1000 surgical admissions to 6.3 per 1000 surgical admissions (relative risk reduction 37%; p = 0.02). Sustained improvement was evident more than 3 years after implementation. Implementation of the surgical-thrombo-embolism-prevention protocol significantly reduced the incidence of postoperative venous thromboembolism supporting its validation at other institutions.

Guidelines for the management of glucocorticoids during the peri-operative period for patients with adrenal insufficiency: Guidelines from the Association of Anaesthetists, the Royal College of Physicians and the Society for Endocrinology UK.

These guidelines aim to ensure that patients with adrenal insufficiency are identified and adequately supplemented with glucocorticoids during the peri-operative period. There are two major categories of adrenal insufficiency. Primary adrenal insufficiency is due to diseases of the adrenal gland (failure of the hormone-producing gland), and secondary adrenal insufficiency is due to deficient adrenocorticotropin hormone secretion by the pituitary gland, or deficient corticotropin-releasing hormone secretion by the hypothalamus (failure of the regulatory centres). Patients taking physiological replacement doses of corticosteroids for either primary or secondary adrenal insufficiency are at significant risk of adrenal crisis and must be given stress doses of hydrocortisone during the peri-operative period. Many more patients other than those with adrenal and hypothalamic-pituitary causes of adrenal failure are receiving glucocorticoids as treatment for other medical conditions. Daily doses of prednisolone of 5 mg or greater in adults and 10-15 mg.m-2 hydrocortisone equivalent or greater in children may result in hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal axis suppression if administered for 1 month or more by oral, inhaled, intranasal, intra-articular or topical routes; this chronic administration of glucocorticoids is the most common cause of secondary adrenal suppression, sometimes referred to as tertiary adrenal insufficiency. A pragmatic approach to adrenal replacement during major stress is required; considering the evidence available, blanket recommendations would not be appropriate, and it is essential for the clinician to remember that adrenal replacement dosing following surgical stress or illness is in addition to usual steroid treatment. Patients with previously undiagnosed adrenal insufficiency sometimes present for the first time following the stress of surgery. Anaesthetists must be familiar with the symptoms and signs of acute adrenal insufficiency so that inadequate supplementation or undiagnosed adrenal insufficiency can be detected and treated promptly. Delays may prove fatal.

The older surgical patient - to operate or not? A state of the art review.

The increasing age and subsequent medical complexity of patients presenting for surgery grants the opportunity to examine the processes and delivery of peri-operative care. There is a need to redesign peri-operative pathways allowing room for shared decision making and personalised, evidence-based care. In times of financial constraint, this is no easy task. However, neglecting to transform services now may lead to challenges in the sustainability of the provision of peri-operative care in the long-term. Challenges in redesigning peri-operative care pathways include identification and optimisation of those at highest peri-operative risk to inform the difficult conversations surrounding the appropriateness of surgery. The moral burden of these conversations on patient and professionals alike is increasingly recognised and managing this issue requires innovative models of collaborative, multidisciplinary and interprofessional working. To operate or not can be a challenging question to answer with a number of different perspectives to consider; not least that of the patient.

Postoperative recovery: the importance of the team.

An ageing population and rising healthcare costs are challenging cost-efficient hospital systems wanting to adapt, employing novel organisational structures designed to merge diverse skill sets. This needs not only physician and nursing leadership but also new models of care. Anaesthetists have expanded their role into the broader multidisciplinary field of peri-operative medicine, emphasising collaboration and safety in health teams. A greater focus on patient-centred care and shared decision making, along with validated metrics to quantify quality improvement activities, have emphasised the importance of comfort, patient satisfaction and quality of life after surgery. Shared decision-making is more likely to be manifest in a flat hierarchy in which each member of the team brings their own experience and skills to optimise patient care. Successful surgery is best achieved by a coordinated, multidisciplinary team, embedded in a culture of collaboration and safety.

Shared decision making in peri-operative medicine: Miles to go in Indian scenario.

Shared Decision Making (SDM) in peri-operative medicine is increasingly encouraged as an ideal model of treatment decision making in the medical encounter. Moreover, it has the potential to improve the quality of the decision-making process for patients and ultimately, patient outcomes. This review focuses on several published literature on SDM in peri-operative medicine, its Implementation, barriers faced by Patient and the Provider, Myths regarding SDM and current scenario of SDM in India. Within the anesthetic community, patient consent is vigorously guided. However, this community suffers from lack of advancements in implementing the patient-focused rather than doctor-focused characteristics of SDM. Out of the several barriers, the most common barrier towards the implementation of SDM is the lack of time from the provider community. Within the anesthesia domain, the consultations discussed directly preceding the surgery do not pursue the customary and highly organized stages of typical outpatient consultations. Under these backgrounds and to be successfully implemented, it becomes imperative to begin the process of SDM pre-operative assessment clinic targeting both the high- and low-risk patients. It is critical to summarise that SDM does not end at the time of anesthesia for the peri-operative healthcare professional, but it gets to carry forward until patient discharge. Therefore, it is carried as the Pinnacle of Patient-Centred Care.