Implementation of continuous temperature monitoring during perioperative care: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: Continuous body temperature monitoring during perioperative care is enabled by using a non-invasive "zero-heat-flux" (ZHF) device. However, rigorous evaluation of whether continuous monitoring capability improves process of care and patient outcomes is lacking. This study assessed the feasibility of a large-scale trial on the impact of continuous ZHF monitoring on perioperative temperature management practices and hypothermia prevention. METHODS: A feasibility study was conducted at a tertiary hospital. Participants included patients undergoing elective surgery under neuraxial or general anesthesia, and perioperative nurses and anesthetists caring for patient participants. Eighty-two patients pre and post introduction of the ZHF device were enrolled. Feasibility outcomes included recruitment and retention, protocol adherence, missing data or device failure, and staff evaluation of intervention feasibility and acceptability. Process of care outcomes included temperature monitoring practices, warming interventions and perioperative hypothermia. RESULTS: There were no adverse events related to the device and feasibility of recruitment was high (60%). Treatment adherence varied across the perioperative pathway (43 to 93%) and missing data due to electronic transfer issues were identified. Provision of ZHF monitoring had most impact on monitoring practices in the Post Anesthetic Care Unit; the impact on intraoperative monitoring practices was minimal. CONCLUSIONS: Enhancements to the design of the ZHF device, particularly for improved data retention and transfer, would be beneficial prior to a large-scale evaluation of whether continuous temperature monitoring will improve patient outcomes. Implementation research designs are needed for future work to improve the complex area of temperature monitoring during surgery.  TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospective registration prior to patient enrolment was obtained from the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) on 16th April 2021 (Registration number: ACTRN12621000438853).

Effect of the COVID-19 pandemic first wave and public policy on elective and emergency surgery provision in Southern Queensland.

BACKGROUND: Several public health initiatives in Australia were implemented in March 2020 to contain the spread of COVID-19. The effect of these initiatives on surgical provision is unknown. The primary objective was to determine the effect of public health policies and surgical society guidelines implemented during the pandemic on elective and emergency caseload of surgical specialities operating within South East Queensland. METHODS: This observational study utilized non re-identifiable electronic data to quantify the caseload of surgical specialities across five secondary and tertiary referral hospitals in South East Queensland prior to and during the implementation of such initiatives. All patients undergoing a surgical procedure between 1 March and 24 April 2019 and the same period in 2020 were included. Participants' demographic and clinical information, such as age, the American Society of Anesthesiologists score, surgical date and location, surgical subspecialty and procedure name, was included. RESULTS: During the 2020 time period, there were 2991 elective cases compared to 4422 surgeries occurring in the same period in 2019 (32.4% reduction). Meanwhile, 2082 emergency surgeries were performed in the 2020 period compared to 2362 in 2019 (12.0% decrease). Ophthalmology and dental/ear, nose and throat/maxillofacial surgery experienced the largest reduction in elective surgeries, whereas emergency caseload increased for vascular and cardiothoracic services, and only slightly decreased for plastics and urology. CONCLUSION: The public health initiatives and guidance implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic reduced surgical specialties' elective caseload. However, emergency caseload was not affected to the same extent. This insight helps to guide resource allocation in future waves of the pandemic.

Examining the psychosocial determinants of women's decisions to delay childbearing.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the psychosocial determinants of women's intentions to delay childbearing until after 35 years? SUMMARY ANSWER: Attitudes, pressure from important others, perceived self-confidence and anticipated regret all influence the decision-making process of women aged 18-30 years to defer their attempts to conceive their first child until 35+ years. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Research has consistently demonstrated that, for many women, the decision to delay childbearing can lead to 'unintentional childlessness' due to a failure to consider the impact of age-related fertility decline. A large body of literature has also found strong links between age-related involuntary infertility and negative psychological impacts, including an increased prevalence of anxiety, depression, guilt, stigma and poor mental health. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: The study initially conducted focus groups designed to ascertain important beliefs informing participants' intentions to delay childbearing. A subsequent larger-scale quantitative questionnaire followed. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Participants (n = 358) were female, aged between 18 and 30 years, lived in Australia, identified as being open to the idea of having children, were heterosexual, had not already had children, were not already pregnant, and had not received a diagnosis of medical infertility prior to participating. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Hierarchical multiple regression analyses showed strong support for psychosocial predictors of attitude, pressure from others and perceived self-confidence as predictors of women's intentions to delay childbearing, accounting for 59% of total variance. The extended model that included anticipated regret, accounted for a significant additional 4.4% variance in intention to delay childbearing past the age of 35 years. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Proportionally more participants were younger, Caucasian, and were university students, thus limiting the generalizability of results to the wider Australian community. Future research in this domain is recommended to adopt a prospective design and incorporate a measure of behaviour to investigate the link between intentions to delay childbearing and future fertility behaviour. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This research augments our understanding of the decision-making process and key beliefs underlying the decision to delay childbearing. Further efforts are needed to advise young women to investigate their fertility options during the peak of their reproductive years in order to prevent negative psychological consequences associated with unintentional childlessness. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: None.