Patient perspective on adapting to bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery.

AIM: Bowel dysfunction continues to be a clinically significant consequence of rectal cancer surgery, affecting quality of life. Rectal cancer patients value self-empowerment and adaptation to change to improve their quality of life in the context of bowel dysfunction. There are limited qualitative data addressing patients' perspectives on adapting to bowel dysfunction. The aim of this study is to evaluate patients' perspectives on adapting to bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery. METHOD: Adult patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery with sphincter preservation at a single colorectal referral centre from July 2017 to July 2020 were included. Patients were excluded if they had surgery <1 year since recruitment, received a permanent stoma or developed recurrence or metastasis. Semistructured interviews were held by phone and transcribed verbatim. Bowel dysfunction was assessed via the low anterior resection syndrome (LARS) score. Thematic analysis was used to identify adaptations which patients found helpful for improving bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery. RESULTS: A total of 54 patient interviews were included. The distribution of patients with no, minor and major LARS was 39%, 22% and 39%, respectively. Four main themes were conceived from the analysis: implementing lifestyle changes, fostering supportive relationships and self-compassion, communication and access to resources, and adapting to social and cultural challenges. Associated subthemes were identified, namely forward planning, self-compassion and addressing social stigma. CONCLUSION: Patients' valuable perspective on adapting to bowel dysfunction involve subtle themes which expand the existing literature. These themes inform a patient-centred approach, which may improve outcomes and quality of care for rectal cancer patients.

Decision-making preferences and regret in rectal cancer patients undergoing restorative proctectomy: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: How patients make treatment choices in rectal cancer is poorly understood and may affect long-term regret and satisfaction. The objective of this study is to characterize decision-making preferences and their effect on decisional regret in patients undergoing restorative proctectomy for rectal cancer. METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted in a single academic specialist rectal cancer center from October 2018 to June 2022. Adult patients who underwent restorative proctectomy at least one year prior were recruited. Health literacy was assessed using the BRIEF instrument. Decision-making preferences regarding cancer treatment were assessed using the Control Preferences Scale. Decisional regret regarding their choice of restorative proctectomy was assessed using the Decision Regret Score. Bowel dysfunction was measured using the low anterior resection syndrome score. RESULTS: Overall, 123 patients were included. Health literacy was categorized as adequate in 63%, marginal in 25%, and limited in 12%. Patients with adequate health literacy were more likely to prefer a collaborative decision-making role compared with those with low health literacy (86% vs 65%, P = .016). Patients with incongruence between preferred and actual decision-making roles were more likely to report high regret (56% vs 25%, P = .003). Patients with major low anterior resection syndrome were also more likely to experience high regret compared with patients with no/minor low anterior resection syndrome (44% vs 25%, P = .036). CONCLUSION: A significant proportion of patients with rectal cancer undergoing restorative proctectomy do not have a decision-making role that is congruent with their preferences, and these patients experience a high degree of regret.

How well do we measure the impact of bowel dysfunction on health-related quality of life after rectal cancer surgery?

BACKGROUND: Rectal cancer surgery risks causing bowel dysfunction, which has an important impact on health-related quality of life. The validity of generic tools used to measure health-related quality of life after bowel dysfunction is unclear. This study aimed to determine the content validity of health-related quality-of-life measurement tools in rectal cancer. METHODS: This was a qualitative single-center study in which adult patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery with sphincter preservation from July 2017 to October 2020 were recruited. Patients were excluded if they developed local metastasis, required a permanent stoma, or had surgery <1 year since recruitment. Telephone-based semi-structured interviews were conducted. Bowel dysfunction was measured using the Low Anterior Resection Syndrome score. Content analysis was achieved using the International Classification of Functioning framework. RESULTS: Recurrent bowel dysfunction-related concepts included "Mental functions," "Defecation functions," "Emotional functions," "Recreation and leisure," "Intimate relationships," and "Remunerative employment." A mean of 7.5 recurrent bowel dysfunction-related concepts were identified within the health-related quality of life instruments analyzed. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-C30 (n = 11) and the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (n = 9) covered the greatest number of recurrent bowel dysfunction-related concepts. Concepts such as "Mental functions," "Urination functions," "Sexual functions," "Driving," and "Mobility" were not covered by any instrument. CONCLUSION: The content of traditional health-related quality-of-life instruments is missing important areas that represent the impact of bowel dysfunction after rectal cancer surgery on health-related quality of life. These findings could help improve patient-centered care in rectal cancer surgery.

Towards a common definition of surgical prehabilitation: a scoping review of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: There is no universally accepted definition for surgical prehabilitation. The objectives of this scoping review were to (1) identify how surgical prehabilitation is defined across randomised controlled trials and (2) propose a common definition. METHODS: The final search was conducted in February 2023 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions (nutrition, exercise, and psychological support) lasting at least 7 days in adults undergoing elective surgery. Qualitative data were analysed using summative content analysis. RESULTS: We identified 76 prehabilitation trials of patients undergoing abdominal (n=26, 34%), orthopaedic (n=20, 26%), thoracic (n=14, 18%), cardiac (n=7, 9%), spinal (n=4, 5%), and other (n=5, 7%) surgeries. Surgical prehabilitation was explicitly defined in more than half of these RCTs (n=42, 55%). Our findings consolidated the following definition: 'Prehabilitation is a process from diagnosis to surgery, consisting of one or more preoperative interventions of exercise, nutrition, psychological strategies and respiratory training, that aims to enhance functional capacity and physiological reserve to allow patients to withstand surgical stressors, improve postoperative outcomes, and facilitate recovery.' CONCLUSIONS: A common definition is the first step towards standardisation, which is needed to guide future high-quality research and advance the field of prehabilitation. The proposed definition should be further evaluated by international stakeholders to ensure that it is comprehensive and globally accepted.

Outcomes reported in randomised trials of surgical prehabilitation: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Heterogeneity of reported outcomes can impact the certainty of evidence for prehabilitation. The objective of this scoping review was to systematically map outcomes and assessment tools used in trials of surgical prehabilitation. METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched in February 2023. Randomised controlled trials of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions (nutrition, exercise, psychological support) lasting at least 7 days in adults undergoing elective surgery were included. Reported outcomes were classified according to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research framework. RESULTS: We included 76 trials, mostly focused on abdominal or orthopaedic surgeries. A total of 50 different outcomes were identified, measured using 184 outcome assessment tools. Observer-reported outcomes were collected in 86% of trials (n=65), with hospital length of stay being most common. Performance outcomes were reported in 80% of trials (n=61), most commonly as exercise capacity assessed by cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Clinician-reported outcomes were included in 78% (n=59) of trials and most frequently included postoperative complications with Clavien-Dindo classification. Patient-reported outcomes were reported in 76% (n=58) of trials, with health-related quality of life using the 36- or 12-Item Short Form Survey being most prevalent. Biomarker outcomes were reported in 16% of trials (n=12) most commonly using inflammatory markers assessed with C-reactive protein. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial heterogeneity in the reporting of outcomes and assessment tools across surgical prehabilitation trials. Identification of meaningful outcomes, and agreement on appropriate assessment tools, could inform the development of a prehabilitation core outcomes set to harmonise outcome reporting and facilitate meta-analyses.

Opioid prescribing practices in breast oncologic surgery-A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In breast oncologic surgery, 75% of patients receive a postoperative opioid prescription at discharge, and 10%-20% will develop persistent opioid use. To inform future institutional guidelines, the objective of this study was to determine baseline opioid prescribing patterns in a single high-volume, referral-based breast center. We hypothesized that opioid prescribing practices varied between procedures and operating surgeons. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all women undergoing breast cancer surgery between January and December 2019. Opioid prescriptions at discharge were converted to morphine milligram equivalents (MME). The primary outcome of interest was MME prescribed at discharge. Multiple linear regression was used to identify factors independently associated with MME prescribed. RESULTS: 392 patients met inclusion criteria; 68.3% underwent partial mastectomy. Median age was 61 (interquartile range [IQR] 51-70). Median MME prescribed at discharge was 112.5 (IQR 75-150); 83.9% of patients were prescribed co-analgesia. The prescriber was a trainee in 37.7% of cases. 15 patients (3.8%) required opioid renewal. On multivariate analysis, axillary procedure was associated with increased MME (ß = 17, 95% CI 5.5-28 and ß = 32, 95% CI 17-47, for sentinel node and axillary dissection, respectively). However, the factor with the greatest impact on MME was operating surgeon (ß = 72, 95% CI 58-87). Residents prescribed less MME compared to attending surgeons (ß = 11, 95% CI -22; -0.06). CONCLUSION: In a tertiary care center, the operating surgeon had the greatest influence on opioid prescribing practices, and trainees tended to prescribe less MME. These findings support the need for a standardized approach to optimize prescribing and reduce opioid-related harms after oncologic breast surgery.

Predictive Factors for Successful Same-Day Discharge After Minimally Invasive Colectomy and Stoma Reversal.

BACKGROUND: Same-day discharge after minimally invasive colorectal surgery is a safe, effective practice in specific patients that can enhance the efficiency of enhanced recovery pathways. OBJECTIVE: To identify predictive factors associated with success or failure of same-day discharge. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study from January 2020 to March 2023. SETTINGS: Tertiary colorectal center. PATIENTS: Adult patients eligible for same-day discharge with remote postdischarge follow-up included those with minimal comorbidities, residing near the hospital, having sufficient home support, and owning a mobile device. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were discharged on the day of surgery upon meeting specific criteria, including adequate pain control, tolerance of oral intake, independent mobility, urination, and the absence of complications. Successful same-day discharge was defined as discharge on the day of surgery without unplanned visits in the first 72 hours. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Factors associated with successful or failed same-day discharge after minimally invasive colorectal surgery. RESULTS: A total of 175 patients (85.3%) were discharged on the day of surgery, with 14 patients (8%) having an unplanned visit within 72 hours. Overall, 161 patients (78.5%) were categorized as same-day discharge success and 44 patients (21.5%) as same-day discharge failure. The same-day discharge failure group had a higher Charlson Comorbidity Index (3.7 vs 2.8, p = 0.03). Mean length of stay (0.8 vs 3.0, p = 0.00), 30-day complications (10% vs 48%, p = 0.00), and readmissions (8% vs 27%, p = 0.00) were higher in the same-day discharge failure group. Regression analysis showed that failed same-day discharge was associated with higher comorbidities (OR 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66-0.95) and prolonged postanesthesia care unit time (OR 0.99; 95% CI, 0.99-0.99). Individuals who received a regional nerve block (OR 4.1; 95% CI, 1.2-14) and those who did not consume postoperative opioids (OR 4.6; 95% CI, 1-21) were more likely to have successful same-day discharge. LIMITATIONS: Single-center study. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that comorbidities and prolonged postanesthesia care unit stays were associated with same-day discharge failure, whereas regional nerve blocks and minimal postoperative opioids were related to success. These factors may inform future research aiming to enhance colorectal surgery recovery protocols. See Video Abstract . FACTORES PREDICTIVOS PARA UN ALTA EXITOSA EL MISMO DA DESPUS DE UNA COLECTOMA MNIMAMENTE INVASIVA Y REVERSIN DEL ESTOMA: ANTECEDENTES:El alta el mismo día después de una cirugía colorrectal mínimamente invasiva es una práctica segura y eficaz en pacientes específicos que puede mejorar la eficiencia de las vías de recuperación mejoradas.OBJETIVO:Identificar factores predictivos asociados con el éxito o fracaso del alta el mismo día.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte prospectivo del 01/2020 al 03/2023.AJUSTES:Centro colorrectal terciario.PACIENTES:Los pacientes adultos elegibles para el alta el mismo día con seguimiento remoto posterior al alta incluyeron aquellos con comorbilidades mínimas, que residían cerca del hospital, tenían suficiente apoyo en el hogar y poseían un dispositivo móvil.INTERVENCIONES:Los pacientes fueron dados de alta el día de la cirugía al cumplir con criterios específicos, incluido un control adecuado del dolor, tolerancia a la ingesta oral, movilidad independiente, micción y ausencia de complicaciones. El alta exitosa el mismo día se definió como el alta el día de la cirugía sin visitas no planificadas en las primeras 72 horas.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Factores asociados con el alta exitosa o fallida el mismo día después de una cirugía colorrectal mínimamente invasiva.RESULTADOS:Un total de 175 (85,3%) pacientes fueron dados de alta el día de la cirugía y 14 (8%) pacientes tuvieron una visita no planificada dentro de las 72 horas. En total, 161 (78,5%) pacientes se clasificaron como éxito del alta el mismo día y 44 (21,5%) pacientes como fracaso del alta el mismo día. El grupo de fracaso del alta el mismo día tuvo un índice de comorbilidad de Charlson más alto (3,7, 2,8, p = 0,03). La duración media de la estancia hospitalaria (0,8, 3,0, p = 0,00), las complicaciones a los 30 días (10%, 48%, p = 0,00) y los reingresos (8%, 27%, p = 0,00) fueron mayores en el mismo día grupo de fallo de descarga. El análisis de regresión mostró que el alta fallida el mismo día se asoció con mayores comorbilidades (OR 0,79; IC del 95 %: 0,66; 0,95) y tiempo prolongado en la unidad de cuidados postanestésicos (OR 0,99; IC del 95 %: 0,99; 0,99). Las personas que recibieron un bloqueo nervioso regional (OR 4,1; IC del 95 %: 1,2, 14) y aquellos que no consumieron opioides posoperatorios (OR 4,6, IC del 95 %: 1-21) tuvieron más probabilidades de tener éxito en el mismo día -descarga.LIMITACIONES:Estudio unicéntrico.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestros hallazgos indican que las comorbilidades y las estancias prolongadas en la unidad de cuidados postanestésicos se asociaron con el fracaso del alta el mismo día, mientras que los bloqueos nerviosos regionales y los opioides postoperatorios mínimos se relacionaron con el éxito. Estos factores pueden informar investigaciones futuras destinadas a mejorar los protocolos de recuperación de la cirugía colorrectal. (Traducción-Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

Effect of video-based self-reflection on intraoperative skills: A pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The value of video-based self-assessment in enhancing surgical skills is uncertain. This study investigates the feasibility and estimates sample size for a full-scale randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of video-based self-assessment to improve surgical performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy in trainees. METHODS: This parallel pilot randomized controlled trial included general surgery trainees performing supervised laparoscopic cholecystectomy randomized 1:1 to control (traditional intraoperative teaching) or intervention group (traditional teaching plus video-based self-assessment). Operative performance was measured by the attending surgeon blinded to group assignment at the time of surgery using standardized assessment tools (Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills and Operative Performance Rating System). The intervention group had access to their video recordings on a web-based platform for review and self-assessment using the same instruments. The primary outcome for the estimation of sample size was the difference in faculty-assessed final operative performance (third submitted case). Feasibility criteria included >85% participation, >85% adherence to case submission and >85% completion of self-assessment. RESULTS: Of 37 eligible trainees approached, 32 consented and were randomized (86%). There were 16 in the intervention group, 15 in the control group (55% male, 55% junior trainees), and 1 was excluded for protocol violation. Twenty-four (75%) of participants submitted 3 cases. Thirteen trainees (81%) accessed the platform and completed 26 (63.2%) case self-assessments. Fifty-five trainees per arm will be needed to power a full-scale laparoscopic cholecystectomy with Global Operative Assessment of Laparoscopic Skills and 130 trainees per arm with Operative Performance Rating System as the assessment tool. CONCLUSION: This pilot study contributes important data to inform the design of an adequately powered randomized controlled trial of video-based self-assessment to improve trainee performance of laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Although a priori trial feasibility criteria were not achieved, automated video capture and storage could significantly improve adherence in future trials.

The impact of patient activation on the effectiveness of digital health remote post-discharge follow-up and same-day-discharge after elective colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Low patient activation (PA) is associated with worse postoperative outcomes, however, its impact on the effectiveness of digital health interventions is unknown. We sought to determine the impact of PA on the effectiveness of digital health application for remote post-discharge follow-up for patients undergoing elective colectomy. METHODS: Data analysis included a control cohort (CC) of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery from 10/2017 to 04/2018 without the digital health intervention and a digital application cohort (DAC) that received a smart phone application for remote post-discharge follow-up from 03/2021 to 08/2022, including a subset of same-day discharge (SDD) patients. PA was measured using the Patient Activation Measure (PAM; score 0-100) and categorized into low (< 55.1) and high (≥ 55.1). The PAM was administered 4-6 weeks before surgery in the DAC group and on postoperative day (POD) 1 in the CC group. The main outcome measure was 30-day emergency department (ED) visits. RESULTS: A total of 164 patients were included (89DAC with 50 SDD, 75CC), with no differences in patient characteristics other than more stoma closures in the DAC group. Overall, 77% of patients had high PA level, with no difference between CC and DAC (77% vs. 81%, p = 0.25). There was no difference in ED visits between CC and DAC (19% vs. 18%, p = 0.90). Overall, low PA was associated more ED visits (29% vs 14%, p = 0.04). In the SDD subgroup, low PA patients had more ED visits (38% vs. 7%, p = 0.015). PA level did not affect app usage metrics. On multiple regression, only low PA remained independently associated with ED visits (OR 3.42, 95%CI 1.27, 9.24). CONCLUSION: Low PA remains an important predictor of surgical outcomes after elective colorectal surgery regardless of the use of a digital health application for remote post-discharge follow-up. This suggests that improving PA levels may improve postoperative outcomes.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Biliary Drainage of First Intent With a Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent vs Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography in Malignant Distal Biliary Obstruction: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study (ELEMENT Trial).

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound-guided choledochoduodenostomy with a lumen-apposing metal stent (EUS-CDS) is a promising modality for management of malignant distal biliary obstruction (MDBO) with potential for better stent patency. We compared its outcomes with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with metal stenting (ERCP-M). METHODS: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, we recruited patients with MDBO secondary to borderline resectable, locally advanced, or unresectable peri-ampullary cancers across 10 Canadian institutions and 1 French institution. This was a superiority trial with a noninferiority assessment of technical success. Patients were randomized to EUS-CDS or ERCP-M. The primary end point was the rate of stent dysfunction at 1 year, considering competing risks of death, clinical failure, and surgical resection. Analyses were performed according to intention-to-treat principles. RESULTS: From February 2019 to February 2022, 144 patients were recruited; 73 were randomized to EUS-CDS and 71 were randomized to ERCP-M. The mean (SD) procedure time was 14.0 (11.4) minutes for EUS-CDS and 23.1 (15.6) minutes for ERCP-M (P < .01); 40% of the former was performed without fluoroscopy. Technical success was achieved in 90.4% (95% CI, 81.5% to 95.3%) of EUS-CDS and 83.1% (95% CI, 72.7% to 90.1%) of ERCP-M with a risk difference of 7.3% (95% CI, -4.0% to 18.8%) indicating noninferiority. Stent dysfunction occurred in 9.6% vs 9.9% of EUS-CDS and ERCP-M cases, respectively (P = .96). No differences in adverse events, pancreaticoduodenectomy and oncologic outcomes, or quality of life were noted. CONCLUSIONS: Although not superior in stent function, EUS-CDS is an efficient and safe alternative to ERCP-M in patients with MDBO. These findings provide evidence for greater adoption of EUS-CDS in clinical practice as a complementary and exchangeable first-line modality to ERCP in patients with MDBO. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT03870386.

Reporting quality of randomized controlled trials in prehabilitation: a scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Inadequate study reporting precludes interpretation of findings, pooling of results in meta-analyses, and delays knowledge translation. While prehabilitation interventions aim to enhance candidacy for surgery, to our knowledge, a review of the quality of reporting in prehabilitation has yet to be conducted. Our objective was to determine the extent to which randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of prehabilitation are reported according to methodological and intervention reporting checklists. METHODS: Eligibility criteria: RCTs of unimodal or multimodal prehabilitation interventions. SOURCES OF EVIDENCE: search was conducted in March 2022 using MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane. CHARTING METHODS: identified studies were compared to CONSORT, CERT & Modified CERT, TIDieR, PRESENT, and CONSORT-SPI. An agreement ratio (AR) was defined to evaluate if applicable guideline items were correctly reported. Data were analyzed as frequency (n, %) and mean with standard deviation (SD). RESULTS: We identified 935 unique articles and included 70 trials published from 1994 to 2022. Most prehabilitation programs comprised exercise-only interventions (n = 40, 57%) and were applied before oncologic surgery (n = 32, 46%). The overall mean AR was 57% (SD: 20.9%). The specific mean ARs were as follows: CONSORT: 71% (SD: 16.3%); TIDieR: 62% (SD:17.7%); CERT: 54% (SD: 16.6%); Modified-CERT: 40% (SD:17.8%); PRESENT: 78% (SD: 8.9); and CONSORT-SPI: 47% (SD: 22.1). CONCLUSION: Altogether, existing prehabilitation trials report approximately half of the checklist items recommended by methodological and intervention reporting guidelines. Reporting practices may improve with the development of a reporting checklist specific to prehabilitation interventions.

Impact of enhanced recovery pathways on patient-reported outcomes after abdominal surgery: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Evidence supports that enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) reduce length of stay and complications; however, these measures may not reflect the perspective of patients who are the main stakeholders in the recovery process. This systematic review aimed to appraise the evidence regarding the impact of ERPs on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after abdominal surgery. METHODS: Five databases (Medline, Embase, Biosis, Cochrane, and Web of Science) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) addressing the impact of ERPs on PROs after abdominal surgery. We focused on distinct periods of recovery: early (within 7 days postoperatively) and late (beyond 7 days). Risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane's RoB 2.0. Results were appraised descriptively as heterogeneity hindered meta-analysis. Certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. RESULTS: Fifty-six RCTs were identified [colorectal (n = 18), hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) (n = 11), upper gastrointestinal (UGI) (n = 10), gynecological (n = 7), urological (n = 7), general surgery (n = 3)]. Most trials had 'some concerns' (n = 30) or 'high' (n = 25) risk of bias. In the early postoperative period, ERPs improved patient-reported general health (colorectal, HPB, UGI, urological; very low to low certainty), physical health (colorectal, gynecological; very low to low certainty), mental health (colorectal, gynecological; very low certainty), pain (all specialties; very low to moderate certainty), and fatigue (colorectal; low certainty). In the late postoperative period, ERPs improved general health (HPB, UGI, urological; very low certainty), physical health (UGI, gynecological, urological; very low to low certainty), mental health (UGI, gynecological, urological; very low certainty), social health (gynecological; very low certainty), pain (gynecological, urological; very low certainty), and fatigue (gynecological; very low certainty). CONCLUSION: This review supports that ERPs may have a positive impact on patient-reported postoperative health status (i.e., general, physical, mental, and social health) and symptom experience (i.e., pain and fatigue) after abdominal surgery; however, data were largely derived from low-quality trials. Although these findings contribute important knowledge to inform evidence-based ERP implementation, there remains a great need to improve PRO assessment in studies focused on postoperative recovery.

Prescription and consumption of opioids after bariatric surgery: a multicenter prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: In the current opioid crisis, bariatric surgical patients are at increased risk of harms related to postoperative opioid overprescribing. This study aimed to assess the extent to which opioids prescribed at discharge after bariatric surgery are consumed by patients. METHODS: This multicenter prospective cohort study included adult patients (≥ 18yo) undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Preoperative assessments included demographics and patient-reported measures. Information regarding surgical and perioperative care interventions (including discharge prescriptions) was obtained from medical records. Self-reported opioid consumption was assessed weekly up to 30 days post-discharge. Number of opioid pills prescribed and consumed was compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Zero-inflated negative binomial regression was used to identify predictors of post-discharge opioid consumption. RESULTS: We analyzed 351 patients (mean age 44 ± 11 years, BMI 45 ± 8.0 kg/m2, 77% female, 71% sleeve gastrectomy, length of stay 1.6 ± 0.6 days). The quantity of opioids prescribed at discharge (median 15 pills [IQR 15-16], 112.5 morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) [IQR 80-112.5]) was significantly higher than patient-reported consumption (median 1 pill [IQR 0-5], 7.5 MMEs [IQR 0-37.5]) (p < 0.001). Overall, 37% of patients did not take any opioids post-discharge and 78.5% of the opioid pills prescribed were unused. Increased post-discharge opioid consumption was associated with male sex (IRR 1.54 [95%CI 1.14 to 2.07]), higher BMI (1.03 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.05]), preoperative opioid use (1.48 [95%CI 1.04 to 2.10]), current smoking (2.32 [95%CI 1.44 to 3.72]), higher PROMIS-29 depression score (1.03 [95% CI 1.01 to 1.04]), anastomotic procedures (1.33 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.75]), and number of pills prescribed (1.04 [95%CI 1.01 to 1.06]). CONCLUSION: This study supports that most opioid pills prescribed to bariatric surgery patients at discharge are not consumed. Patient and procedure-related factors may predict opioid consumption. Individualized post-discharge analgesia strategies with minimal or no opioids may be feasible and should be further investigated in future research.

Enhanced recovery protocols in trauma and emergency abdominal surgery: a scoping review.

PURPOSE: Enhanced recovery protocols (ERP) have been shown to improve patient outcomes and is now regarded as standard of care in elective surgical setting. However, the literature addressing the use of ERP in trauma and emergency abdominal surgery (EAS) is limited and heterogenous. A scoping review was conducted to comprehensively assess the literature on ERP in trauma laparotomy and EAS. METHODS: Three bibliographic databases were searched for studies addressing ERP in trauma laparotomy and EAS. We extracted the study characteristics including study design, country, year, surgical procedures, ERP components used, and outcomes. Reporting was according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Extension for Scoping Reviews. RESULTS: After screening of 1631 articles for eligibility, 39 studies were included in the review. There has been an increase in the number of articles in the field, with 44% of the identified studies published between 2020 and 2022. Fourteen different protocols were identified, with varying components for each operative phase (preoperative; 29, intraoperative; 20, postoperative; 27). The majority of the studies addressed the effectiveness of ERP on clinical outcomes (31/39: 79%). Only two studies (5%) included purely trauma populations. CONCLUSIONS: Studies on ERP implementations in the EAS populations were published across a range of countries, with improved outcomes. However, a clear gap in ERP research on trauma laparotomy was identified. This scoping review indicates that standardization of care through ERP implementation has potential to improve the quality of care in both EAS and trauma laparotomy.

Predictors of post-discharge pain and satisfaction with pain management after laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Pain management after bariatric surgery remains challenging given the risk for analgesia-related adverse events (e.g., opioid use disorder, marginal ulcers). Identifying modifiable factors associated with patient-reported pain outcomes may improve quality of care. We evaluated the extent to which patient and procedural factors predict 7-day post-discharge pain intensity, pain interference, and satisfaction with pain management after bariatric surgery. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included adults undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery at two university-affiliated hospitals and one private clinic. Preoperative assessments included demographics, Pain Catastrophizing Scale (score range 0-52), Patient Activation Measure (low [< 55.1] vs. high [≥ 55.1]), pain expectation (0-10), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-29 (PROMIS-29) anxiety and depression scales. At 7 days post-discharge, assessments included PROMIS-29 pain intensity (0-10) and pain interference scales (41.6-75.6), and satisfaction with pain management (high [10-9] vs. lower [8-0]). Linear and logistic regression were used to assess the association of pain outcomes with potential predictors. RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-one patients were included (mean age = 44 ± 11 years, BMI = 45 ± 8 kg/m2, 77% female, 71% sleeve gastrectomy). At 7 days post-discharge, median (IQR) patient-reported pain intensity was 2.5 (1-5), pain interference was 55.6 (52.0-61.2), and 76% of patients reported high satisfaction with pain management. Pain intensity was predicted by preoperative anxiety (ß + 0.04 [95% CI + 0.01 to + 0.07]) and pain expectation (+ 0.15 [+ 0.05 to + 0.25]). Pain interference was predicted by preoperative anxiety (+ 0.22 [+ 0.11 to + 0.33]), pain expectation (+ 0.47 [+ 0.10 to + 0.84]), and age (- 0.09 [- 0.174 to - 0.003]). Lower satisfaction was predicted by low patient activation (OR 1.94 [1.05-3.58]), higher pain catastrophizing (1.03 [1.003-1.05]), 30-day complications (3.27 [1.14-9.38]), and age (0.97 [0.948-0.998]). CONCLUSION: Patient-related factors are important predictors of post-discharge pain outcomes after bariatric surgery. Our findings highlight the value of addressing educational, psychological, and coping strategies to improve postoperative pain outcomes.

The impact of restorative proctectomy versus permanent colostomy on health-related quality of life after rectal cancer surgery using the patient-generated index.

BACKGROUND: The impact of bowel dysfunction versus colostomy on quality of life after rectal cancer surgery is poorly understood. BACKGROUND: To evaluate the quality of life after rectal cancer surgery in patients with colostomy versus restorative proctectomy. METHODS: A mixed-methods study measuring quality of life using the Patient-Generated Index, patients were asked to list up to 5 areas of their life affected by their surgery. Areas were then weighted according to patients' preferences for improvement to generate a score from 0-100. The areas reported by patients were linked to the International Classification of Functioning for content analysis. Bowel dysfunction was measured using the low anterior resection syndrome score, and patients were then grouped according to (1) colostomy, (2) no/minor, or (3) major low anterior resection syndrome. Quality of life was compared between groups. RESULTS: Overall, 121 patients were included (colostomy n = 39, restorative proctectomy n = 82). There were no differences in demographics, neoadjuvant radiotherapy, or time to follow-up between groups. In the restorative proctectomy group, 53% had no/minor, and 47% had major low anterior resection syndrome. Overall, patients with colostomy had significantly lower quality-of-life scores than those with restorative proctectomy. However, patients with major low anterior resection syndrome scored similarly to those with colostomy. On content analysis, patients with colostomies reported more problems with sexual function, body image, and sports. Patients with restorative proctectomy reported more problems with sleep, using transportation, and taking care of themselves. CONCLUSION: Colostomy has a more detrimental impact on quality of life than restorative proctectomy. However, bowel dysfunction severity is important to consider. The patient experience between treatments differs.

Patients' experiences undergoing cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative study.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to understand patients' experiences undergoing cancer surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to COVID-19, many elective cancer surgeries were delayed creating a massive backlog of cases. Patients' experiences with surgical delays may inform healthcare systems' responses to the backlog of cases and guide preparations for future healthcare emergencies. METHODS: This was a qualitative description study. Patients undergoing general surgery for cancer at two university-affiliated hospitals between March 2020 and January 2021 were invited to one-to-one interviews. Patients were purposefully selected using quota sampling until interviews produced no new information (i.e., thematic saturation). Interviews were conducted using a semi-structured guide and analyzed according to inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty patients were included [mean age 64 ± 12.9; male (n = 10); surgical delay (n = 14); cancer sites: breast (n = 8), skin (n = 4), hepato-pancreato-biliary (n = 4), colorectal (n = 2), and gastro-esophageal (n = 2)]. When determining their willingness to undergo surgery, patients weighed the risk of COVID-19 infection against the urgency of their disease. Changes to the hospital environment (e.g., COVID-19 preventative measures) and deviations from expected treatment (e.g., alternative treatments, remote consultations, rescheduled care) caused diverse psychological responses, ranging from increased satisfaction to severe distress. Patients employed several coping strategies to mitigate distress, including eliciting reassurance from care providers, seeking information from unconventional sources, and reframing care interruptions. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in care during the pandemic elicited diverse psychological responses from patients undergoing cancer surgery. Coping was facilitated by consistent communication with providers, emphasizing the importance of patient-centered expectation setting as we prepare for the future within and beyond the pandemic.

Understanding the Impact of Bowel Dysfunction on Quality of Life After Rectal Cancer Surgery From the Patient's Perspective.

BACKGROUND: Bowel dysfunction is an important consequence of rectal cancer surgery' and the specific quality-of-life domains that are affected remain unclear and unaddressed by generic surveys. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify quality-of-life domains most affected by rectal cancer surgery. DESIGN: Qualitative content analysis. SETTINGS: Semistructured interviews conducted by telephone with patients recruited from a single university-affiliated colorectal referral center. PATIENTS: Adult patients were included if they underwent rectal cancer surgery with sphincter preservation from July 2017 to July 2020. Patients were excluded if their surgery was <1 year since the recruitment date, received a permanent stoma, or developed recurrence or metastasis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Bowel dysfunction was evaluated via the low anterior resection syndrome score. Interview transcripts were coded by 2 independent reviewers and evaluated for concordance. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify themes, and their frequency of occurrence was quantified (percent total number of interviews). RESULTS: A total of 54 patient interviews were conducted. Analysis revealed 5 quality-of-life-related themes impacted by bowel dysfunction: experiencing psychological and emotional stress, challenging roles and relationships within society, encountering physical limitations, restricting leisure and recreational activities, and learning self-empowerment and adapting to change. Patients with minor and major bowel dysfunction were more likely to report disruption to their social activities and their role as a sexual partner versus those with no bowel dysfunction. Patients with major bowel dysfunction were more likely to report effects on sleep versus those with no and minor bowel dysfunction. LIMITATIONS: Single center, self-reported, and observer bias. CONCLUSION: The impact of bowel dysfunction on quality of life includes a wide range of themes that extend beyond traditional measures. These results may help better inform patients in the preoperative setting and serve as a basis for the development of a more patient-centered quality-of-life survey. COMPRENDER EL IMPACTO DE LA DISFUNCIN INTESTINAL EN LA CALIDAD DE VIDA DESPUS DE LA CIRUGA DE CNCER DE RECTO DESDE LA PERSPECTIVA DEL PACIENTE: ANTECEDENTES:La disfunción intestinal es una consecuencia importante de la cirugía del cáncer de recto y los dominios específicos de la calidad de vida que se ven afectados siguen sin estar claros y sin abordarse en las encuestas genéricas.OBJETIVO:Identificar los dominios de calidad de vida más afectados por la cirugía del cáncer de recto.DISEÑO:Análisis cualitativo de contenido.ÁMBITOS:Entrevistas semiestructuradas realizadas por teléfono con pacientes reclutados de un único centro de referencia colorrectal afiliado a una universidad.PACIENTES:Pacientes adultos intervenidos de cáncer de recto con preservación de esfínter del 07/2017 al 07/2020. Los pacientes fueron excluidos si su cirugía fue <1 año desde la fecha de reclutamiento, recibieron un estoma permanente o desarrollaron recurrencia o metástasis.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:La disfunción intestinal se evaluó a través de la puntuación del síndrome de resección anterior baja. Dos revisores independientes codificaron las transcripciones de las entrevistas y evaluaron su concordancia. Se utilizó el análisis de contenido cualitativo para identificar los temas, cuantificando su frecuencia de aparición (porcentaje del número total de entrevistas).RESULTADOS:Se realizaron un total de 54 entrevistas a pacientes. El análisis reveló cinco temas relacionados con la calidad de vida afectados por la disfunción intestinal: experimentar estrés psicológico y emocional, roles y relaciones desafiantes dentro de la sociedad, encontrar limitaciones físicas, restringir actividades recreativas y de ocio, y autoempoderamiento y adaptación al cambio. Los pacientes con disfunción intestinal menor y mayor tenían más probabilidades de informar la interrupción de las actividades sociales y el papel como pareja sexual en comparación con aquellos sin disfunción intestinal. Los pacientes con disfunción intestinal importante tenían más probabilidades de informar efectos sobre el sueño en comparación con aquellos sin disfunción intestinal o con disfunción intestinal menor.LIMITACIONES:Sesgo de un solo centro, autoinformado y observador.CONCLUSIÓN:El impacto de la disfunción intestinal en la calidad de vida incluye una amplia gama de temas que se extienden más allá de las medidas tradicionales. Estos resultados pueden ayudar a informar mejor a los pacientes en el entorno preoperatorio y servir como base para el desarrollo de una encuesta de calidad de vida más centrada en el paciente. (Traducción-Dr. Yesenia Rojas-Khalil ).

A retrospective analysis of early discharge following minimally invasive colectomy in an enhanced recovery pathway.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing evidence to support discharge prior to gastrointestinal recovery following colorectal surgery. Furthermore, many patients are discharged early despite being excluded from an ambulatory colectomy pathway. The objective of this study was to determine the outcomes of patients discharged early following laparoscopic colectomy in an enhanced recovery pathway (ERP). METHODS: A retrospective review of all adult patients undergoing elective laparoscopic colectomy at a single university-affiliated colorectal referral center (08/2017-06/2021) was performed. Patients were included if they had undergone elective laparoscopic colectomy or ileostomy closure and excluded if they had been enrolled in an ambulatory colectomy pathway. Patients were then divided into three groups: LOS =1 day, LOS 2-3 days, and LOS 4+ days. The main outcomes were 30-day emergency room (ER) visits and readmissions. Reasons for inpatient stay per post-operative day (POD) were also recorded. RESULTS: A total of 497 patients were included [LOS1 n = 63 (13%), LOS2-3 n = 284 (57%), and LOS4+ n = 150 (30%)]. There were no differences in patient characteristics, diagnosis, or procedure between the groups. Patients were discharged with gastrointestinal recovery (GI-3) in 54% LOS1 vs. 98% LOS2-3 vs. 100% LOS4+ (p<0.001). Shorter procedure duration, transversus abdominus plane block, and lower opioid requirements were associated with shorter LOS (p<0.001). The absence of flatus was the most common reason to keep patients hospitalized: 61% on POD1, 21% on POD2, and 8% on POD3 (p<0.001). There were no differences in 30-day emergency visits, or readmission between the groups. In the LOS1 group, there were no differences in outcomes between patients with full return of bowel function at discharge compared to those without. CONCLUSION: Discharge on POD1 was not associated with increased emergency department use, complications, or readmissions. Importantly, full return of bowel function at discharge did not affect outcomes. There may be potential to expand eligibility criteria for ambulatory colectomy protocol.

S110-Opioid-free analgesia after outpatient general surgery: A qualitative study focused on the perspectives of patients and clinicians involved in a pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-free analgesia (OFA) may mitigate opioid-related harms after outpatient general surgery; however, the comparative effectiveness of this approach should be assessed in robust randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Undertaking an RCT on OFA raises important practical concerns, including surgeon and patient hesitation regarding pain management without opioids. We conducted a qualitative study to explore patients' and clinicians' perspectives and experiences with a pilot trial focused on OFA after outpatient general surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing outpatient abdominal and breast procedures were randomized to receive post-discharge opioid analgesia (OA) or OFA. Semi-structured interviews with patients and clinicians involved in the trial were conducted to elicit personal perspectives and experiences. Purposive sampling for maximum variation was used to recruit participants with diverse characteristics. Transcribed interviews were assessed using inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Ten patients (5 abdominal, 5 breast) and 10 clinicians (6 surgeons, 2 anesthesiologists, 2 nurses) were interviewed. Five major themes emerged: readiness for trial engagement, pre-trial thoughts about the interventions, postoperative pain experiences, intervention acceptability, and trial refinement. Most patients were open to OFA. Clinicians expressed willingness to prescribe OFA, particularly after less invasive procedures and when using peripheral nerve blocks (PNBs). Concerns were raised regarding the adequacy of pain control and side effects of non-opioid drugs (e.g., NSAID-induced bleeding, kidney injury). Overall, participants were enthusiastic about the trial and recognized its relevance; clinicians praised the study design and organization; and patients valued the use of electronic questionnaires. Suggestions for improvements included preventing potential bias arising from the use of PNBs (i.e., via standardization or stratification) and reducing patient burden (i.e., decreasing postoperative questionnaires). CONCLUSION: Patients and clinicians who participated in a pilot RCT generally accept the clinical equipoise between OA versus OFA after outpatient general surgery and recognize the need for methodologically robust trials to inform evidence-based analgesia prescribing.