Comparison of postoperative mobilization measurements by activPAL versus Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility scale after major abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility scale is a validated tool for assessing patient mobility in the hospital. It has excellent inter-rater and test-retest reliabilities, but it is unknown how accurately Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility documentation reflects the patients' mobility performance in the immediate postoperative period compared to objective measures such as accelerometers. METHODS: In this single-center observational study, consented adults undergoing open abdominal surgery wore a research-grade accelerometer, activPAL, starting immediately postoperatively until hospital discharge or up to 7 days. We collected the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility scores documented by hospital staff via retrospective chart review and evaluated their accuracy in describing the type, frequency, and volume of postoperative out-of-bed mobilization using the activPAL as the criterion. RESULTS: We analyzed data from 56 participants. The activPAL showed that participants spent 97.7% of their time lying in bed or sitting in a chair. Meanwhile, the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility documentation of preambulatory activities (scores 1-5) was rare. The activPAL detected 4 times more out-of-bed mobilization than routine Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility documentation. Whereas the frequency of activPAL-measured out-of-bed mobilization increased steadily to a median of 9 sessions by postoperative day 6, the number of Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility documentation remained around twice daily. ActivPAL measurements demonstrated that Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility documentation of ambulatory sessions (scores 6-8) was accurate. CONCLUSIONS: We found that routine Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility documentation did not accurately detect preambulatory activities or the overall frequency of out-of-bed mobility sessions, poorly reflecting the highly sedentary behaviors of the acute postoperative inpatients and highlighting the need to improve clinical documentation or use alternative methods to track postoperative mobilization.

Accelerometer-Measured Inpatient Physical Activity and Associated Outcomes After Major Abdominal Surgery: Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: It remains unclear how inpatient physical activity after major abdominal surgery affects outcomes. Accelerometer research may provide further evidence for postoperative mobilization. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to summarize the current literature evaluating the impact of accelerometer-measured postoperative physical activity on outcomes after major abdominal surgery. METHODS: We searched PubMed and Google Scholar in October 2021 to conduct a systematic review. Studies were included if they used accelerometers to measure inpatient physical behaviors immediately after major abdominal surgery, defined as any nonobstetric procedures performed under general anesthesia requiring hospital admission. Studies were eligible only if they evaluated the effects of physical activity on postoperative outcomes such as postoperative complications, return of gastrointestinal function, hospital length of stay, discharge destination, and readmissions. We excluded studies involving participants aged <18 years. Risk of bias was assessed using the risk-of-bias assessment tool for nonrandomized studies (RoBANS) for observational studies and the revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Findings were summarized by qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: We identified 15 studies. Risk of bias was high in 14 (93%) of the 15 studies. Most of the studies (11/15, 73%) had sample sizes of <100. Of the 15 studies, 13 (87%) included the general surgery population, 1 (7%) was a study of patients who had undergone gynecologic surgery, and 1 (7%) included a mixed (abdominal, thoracic, gynecologic, and orthopedic) surgical population. Of the 15 studies, 12 (80%) used consumer-grade accelerometers to measure physical behaviors. Step count was the most commonly reported physical activity outcome (12/15, 80%). In the observational studies (9/15, 60%), increased physical activity during the immediate postoperative period was associated with earlier return of gastrointestinal function, fewer surgical and pulmonary complications, shorter hospital length of stay, and fewer readmissions. In the RCTs (6/15, 40%), only 1 (17%) of the 6 studies demonstrated improved outcomes (shorter time to flatus and hospital length of stay) when a mobility-enhancing intervention was compared with usual care. Notably, mobility-enhancing interventions used in 4 (67%) of the 6 RCTs did not result in increased postoperative physical activity. CONCLUSIONS: Although observational studies show strong associations between postoperative physical activity and outcomes after major abdominal surgery, RCTs have not proved the benefit of mobility-enhancing interventions compared with usual care. The overall risk of bias was high, and we could not synthesize specific recommendations for postoperative mobilization. Future research would benefit from improving study design, increasing methodologic rigor, and measuring physical behaviors beyond step counts to understand the impact of postoperative mobilization on outcomes after major abdominal surgery.

Pre-Existing Anxiety and Depression in Injured Older Adults: An Under-Recognized Comorbidity With Major Health Implications.

To compare differences in baseline depression and anxiety screenings between older injured patients with pre-existing diagnoses and those without. Background: Little is known about the prevalence and impact of psychiatric comorbidities on early postinjury depression and anxiety in nonneurologically injured older adults. Methods: This was a retrospective post-hoc analysis of data from the Trauma Medical Home, a multicenter randomized controlled trial (R01AG052493-01A1) that explored the effect of a collaborative care model on postinjury recovery for older adults compared to usual care. Results: Nearly half of the patients screened positive for at least mild depressive symptoms as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9. Forty-one percent of the patients screened positive for at least mild anxiety symptoms as measured by the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale. Female patients with a history of concurrent anxiety and depression, greater injury severity scores, and higher Charlson scores were more likely to have mild anxiety at baseline assessment. Patients with a history of depression only, a prior history of depression and concurrent anxiety, and higher Charlson scores (greater medical comorbidity) had greater odds of at least mild depression at the time of hospital discharge after traumatic injury. Conclusions: Anxiety and depression are prevalent in the older adult trauma population, and affect women disproportionately. A dual diagnosis of depression and anxiety is particularly morbid. Mental illness must be considered and addressed with the same importance as other medical diagnoses in patients with injuries.

Perioperative Risk Factors for Postoperative Delirium in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium affects up to 50% of patients undergoing esophagectomy and is associated with negative outcomes. The perioperative risk factors for delirium in this population are not well understood. We conducted this study to assess perioperative risk factors for postoperative delirium among esophagectomy patients. METHODS: We performed a secondary data analysis of patients enrolled in a randomized controlled trial evaluating the efficacy of haloperidol prophylaxis postoperatively in reducing delirium among esophagectomy patients. Postoperative delirium was assessed twice daily using the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU. Univariate and logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the association between perioperative variables and development of postoperative delirium. RESULTS: Of 84 consecutive esophagectomy patients, postoperative delirium developed in 27 (32%). These patients had higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores (22.1 [SD, 6.5] vs 17.4 [SD, 6.8]; p = 0.003), longer mechanical ventilation days (1.7 [SD, 1.4] days vs 1.0 [SD, 1.1] days; p = 0.001), and longer intensive care unit (ICU) days (5.1 [SD, 2.6] days vs 2.6 [SD, 1.6] days; p < 0.001). In a logistic regression model, only ICU length of stay had a significant association with postoperative delirium (odds ratio, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 1.21 to 2.25). CONCLUSIONS: ICU length of stay was significantly associated with postoperative delirium. Other perioperative factors, including duration of procedure, blood loss, and hemoglobin levels, were not significantly associated with postoperative delirium.

Preventing Postoperative Delirium After Major Noncardiac Thoracic Surgery-A Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy of haloperidol in reducing postoperative delirium in individuals undergoing thoracic surgery. DESIGN: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Surgical intensive care unit (ICU) of tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals undergoing thoracic surgery (N=135). INTERVENTION: Low-dose intravenous haloperidol (0.5 mg three times daily for a total of 11 doses) administered postoperatively. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was delirium incidence during hospitalization. Secondary outcomes were time to delirium, delirium duration, delirium severity, and ICU and hospital length of stay. Delirium was assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method for the ICU and delirium severity using the Delirium Rating Scale-Revised. RESULTS: Sixty-eight participants were randomized to receive haloperidol and 67 placebo. No significant differences were observed between those receiving haloperidol and those receiving placebo in incident delirium (n=15 (22.1%) vs n=19 (28.4%); p = .43), time to delirium (p = .43), delirium duration (median 1 day, interquartile range (IQR) 1-2 days vs median 1 day, IQR 1-2 days; p = .71), delirium severity, ICU length of stay (median 2.2 days, IQR 1-3.3 days vs median 2.3 days, IQR 1-4 days; p = .29), or hospital length of stay (median 10 days, IQR 8-11.5 days vs median 10 days, IQR 8-12 days; p = .41). In the esophagectomy subgroup (n = 84), the haloperidol group was less likely to experience incident delirium (n=10 (23.8%) vs n=17 (40.5%); p = .16). There were no differences in time to delirium (p = .14), delirium duration (median 1 day, IQR 1-2 days vs median 1 day, IQR 1-2 days; p = .71), delirium severity, or hospital length of stay (median 11 days, IQR 10-12 days vs median days 11, IQR 10-15 days; p = .26). ICU length of stay was significantly shorter in the haloperidol group (median 2.8 days, IQR 1.1-3.8 days vs median 3.1 days, IQR 2.1-5.1 days; p = .03). Safety events were comparable between the groups. CONCLUSION: Low-dose postoperative haloperidol did not reduce delirium in individuals undergoing thoracic surgery but may be efficacious in those undergoing esophagectomy. J Am Geriatr Soc 66:2289-2297, 2018.