Failure-to-rescue rate as a measure of quality of care in a cardiac surgery recovery unit: a five-year study.

BACKGROUND: Failure to rescue, which is defined as the probability of death after a complication that was not present on admission, was introduced as a quality measure in the 1990s, to complement mortality and morbidity outcomes. The objective of this study was to evaluate possible incremental benefits of measuring failure to rescue after cardiac surgery, to facilitate quality improvement efforts. METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on 4,978 consecutive patients who underwent cardiac operations during a 5-year period. Institutional logistic regression models were used to generate predicted rates of mortality and major complications. Frequency distributions of morbidities were determined, and failure to rescue was calculated. The annual failure-to-rescue rates were contrasted using χ(2) tests and compared with morbidity and mortality measures. RESULTS: The overall mortality rate was 3.6%, the total complication rate was 16.8%, and the failure-to-rescue rate was 19.8% (95% confidence interval, 17.1% to 22.7%). The predicted risk of mortality and of major complications increased during the last 2 years of the study, whereas the observed complication rate decreased. Failure to rescue for new renal failure was the highest of all complications (48.4%), followed by septicemia (42.6%). Despite the decreased complication rate toward the end of the study, the failure-to-rescue rate did not change significantly (p = 0.28). CONCLUSIONS: Failure to rescue should be monitored as a quality-of-care metric, in addition to mortality and complication rates. Postoperative renal failure and septicemia still have a high failure-to-rescue rate and should be targeted by quality improvement efforts.

Impact of the opening of a specialized cardiac surgery recovery unit on postoperative outcomes in an academic health sciences centre.

PURPOSE: It is controversial as to whether cardiac surgery patients are optimally managed in a mixed medical-surgical intensive care unit (ICU) or in a specialized postoperative unit. We conducted a prospective cohort study in an academic health sciences centre to compare outcomes before and following the opening of a specialized cardiac surgery recovery unit (CSRU) in April 2005. METHODS: The study cohort included 2,599 consecutive patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), valve and combined CABG-valve procedures from April 2004 to March 2006. From April 2004 to March 2005 (year 1) all patients received postoperative care in mixed medical-surgical ICUs at two different sites staffed by critical care consultants, fellows and residents. From April 2005 until March 2006 (year 2) patients were cared for in a newly-established CSRU on one site staffed by cardiac anesthesiology fellows, a nurse practitioner and consultants in critical care, cardiac anesthesiology and cardiac surgery. The effect of this change on in-hospital mortality, the incidence of ten major postoperative complications, postoperative ventilation hours, readmission rates and case cancellations due to a lack of capacity was assessed using Chi-square or Wilcoxon tests, where appropriate. RESULTS: Coronary artery bypass grafting, valve and combined CABG-valve mortality rates were similar in years 1 and 2. There was a significant reduction in the composite major complication rate (16.3% to 13.0%, P=0.02) and in median postoperative ventilation hours (8.8 vs 8.0 hr, P=0.005) from year 1 to 2. On multivariable logistic regression analysis, the pre-merger interval (year 1) was a significant independent predictor of the occurrence of death or major complications. CONCLUSION: A specialized CSRU with a multi-disciplinary consultant model was associated with stable or improved outcomes postoperatively, when compared to a mixed medical- surgical ICU model of cardiac surgical care.

The effects of perioperative beta-blockade: results of the Metoprolol after Vascular Surgery (MaVS) study, a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing vascular surgery comprise the highest risk group for perioperative cardiac mortality and morbidity after noncardiac procedures. Many current guidelines recommend the use of beta-blockers in all patients undergoing vascular surgery. We report a trial of the perioperative administration of metoprolol and its effects on the incidence of cardiac complications at 30 days and 6 months after vascular surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing abdominal aortic surgery and infrainguinal or axillofemoral revascularizations were recruited to a double-blind randomized controlled trial of perioperative metoprolol versus placebo. Patients were randomized to receive study medication, starting 2 hours preoperatively until hospital discharge or maximum of 5 days postoperatively. Primary outcome were postoperative 30-day composite incidence of nonfatal myocardial infarction, unstable angina, new congestive heart failure, new atrial or ventricular dysrhythmia requiring treatment, or cardiac death. RESULTS: Patients were randomized to receive either metoprolol (n = 246) or placebo (n = 250). Primary outcome events at 30 days postoperative occurred in 25 (10.2%) versus 30 (12.0%) (P = .57) in metoprolol and placebo groups, respectively (relative risk reduction 15.3%, 95% CI -38.3% to 48.2%). Observed effects at 6 months were not significantly different (P = .81) (relative risk reduction 6.2%, 95% CI% -58.4% to 43.8%). Intraoperative bradycardia requiring treatment was more frequent in the metoprolol group (53/246 vs 19/250, P = .00001), as was intraoperative hypotension requiring treatment (114/246 vs 84/250, P = .0045). CONCLUSION: Our results showed metoprolol was not effective in reducing the 30-day and 6-month postoperative cardiac event rates. Prophylactic use of perioperative beta-blockers in all vascular patients is not indicated.