Just-in-Time In Situ Simulation Training as a Preparedness Measure for the Perioperative Care of COVID-19 Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Routine workflows were redesigned during the first surge of the COVID-19 pandemic to standardize perioperative management of patients and minimize the risk of viral exposure and transmission to staff members. Just-in-time (JIT), in situ simulation training was adopted to implement urgent change, the value of which in a public health crisis has not previously been explored. METHODS: Implementation of workflow changes in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic was accomplished through JIT, in situ simulation training, delivered over a period of 3 weeks to participants from anesthesia, nursing, and surgery, within our healthcare network. The perceived value of this training method was assessed using a postsimulation training survey, composed of Likert scale assessments and free-text responses. The impact on change in practice was assessed by measuring compliance with new COVID-19 workflows for cases of confirmed or suspected COVID-19 managed in the operating room, between March and August 2020. RESULTS: Postsimulation survey responses collected from 110 of 428 participants (25.7%) demonstrated significant positive shifts along the Likert scale on perceived knowledge of new workflow processes, comfort in adopting them in practice and probability that training would have an impact on future practice (all P s < 0.001). Free-text responses reflected appreciation for the training being timely, hands-on, and interprofessional. Compliance with new COVID workflows protocols in practice was 95% (121 of 127 cases) and was associated with lower than expected healthcare worker test positive rates (<1%) within the network during this same period. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support JIT, in situ simulation training as a preparedness measure for the perioperative care of COVID-19 patients and demonstrate the value of this approach during public health crises.

Association Between Intraoperative Arterial Hypotension and Postoperative Delirium After Noncardiac Surgery: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear whether intraoperative arterial hypotension is associated with postoperative delirium. We hypothesized that intraoperative hypotension within a range frequently observed in clinical practice is associated with increased odds of delirium after surgery. METHODS: Adult noncardiac surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia at 2 academic medical centers between 2005 and 2017 were included in this retrospective cohort study. The primary exposure was intraoperative hypotension, defined as the cumulative duration of an intraoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) <55 mm Hg, categorized into and short (<15 minutes; median [interquartile range {IQR}], 2 [1-4] minutes) and prolonged (≥15 minutes; median [IQR], 21 [17-31] minutes) durations of intraoperative hypotension. The primary outcome was a new diagnosis of delirium within 30 days after surgery. In secondary analyses, we assessed the association between a MAP decrease of >30% from baseline and postoperative delirium. Multivariable logistic regression adjusted for patient- and procedure-related factors, including demographics, comorbidities, and markers of procedural severity, was used. RESULTS: Among 316,717 included surgical patients, 2183 (0.7%) were diagnosed with delirium within 30 days after surgery; 41.7% and 2.6% of patients had a MAP <55 mm Hg for a short and a prolonged duration, respectively. A MAP <55 mm Hg was associated with postoperative delirium compared to no hypotension (short duration of MAP <55 mm Hg: adjusted odds ratio [ORadj], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.11-1.33; P < .001 and prolonged duration of MAP <55 mm Hg: ORadj, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.27-1.94; P < .001). Compared to a short duration of a MAP <55 mm Hg, a prolonged duration of a MAP <55 mm Hg was associated with greater odds of postoperative delirium (ORadj, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.05-1.58; P = .016). The association between intraoperative hypotension and postoperative delirium was duration-dependent (ORadj for every 10 cumulative minutes of MAP <55 mm Hg: 1.06; 95% CI, 1.02-1.09; P =.001) and magnified in patients who underwent surgeries of longer duration (P for interaction = .046; MAP <55 mm Hg versus no MAP <55 mm Hg in patients undergoing surgery of >3 hours: ORadj, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.23-1.61; P < .001). A MAP decrease of >30% from baseline was not associated with postoperative delirium compared to no hypotension, also when additionally adjusted for the cumulative duration of a MAP <55 mm Hg (short duration of MAP decrease >30%: ORadj, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.91-1.40; P = .262 and prolonged duration of MAP decrease >30%: ORadj, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.95-1.49; P = .141). CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, a MAP <55 mm Hg was associated with a duration-dependent increase in odds of postoperative delirium. This association was magnified in patients who underwent surgery of long duration.

Effect of Intraoperative Arterial Hypotension on the Risk of Perioperative Stroke After Noncardiac Surgery: A Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative cerebral blood flow is mainly determined by cerebral perfusion pressure and cerebral autoregulation of vasomotor tone. About 1% of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery develop ischemic stroke. We hypothesized that intraoperative hypotension within a range frequently observed in clinical practice is associated with an increased risk of perioperative ischemic stroke within 7 days after surgery. METHODS: Adult noncardiac surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center and Massachusetts General Hospital between 2005 and 2017 were included in this retrospective cohort study. The primary exposure was intraoperative hypotension, defined as a decrease in mean arterial pressure (MAP) below 55 mm Hg, categorized into no intraoperative hypotension, short (<15 minutes, median [interquartile range {IQR}], 2 minutes [1-5 minutes]) and prolonged (≥15 minutes, median [IQR], 21 minutes [17-31 minutes]) durations. The primary outcome was a new diagnosis of early perioperative ischemic stroke within 7 days after surgery. In secondary analyses, we assessed the effect of a MAP decrease by >30% from baseline on perioperative stroke. Analyses were adjusted for the preoperative STRoke After Surgery (STRAS) prediction score, work relative value units, and duration of surgery. RESULTS: Among 358,391 included patients, a total of 1553 (0.4%) experienced an early perioperative ischemic stroke. About 42% and 3% of patients had a MAP of below 55 mm Hg for a short and a prolonged duration, and 49% and 29% had a MAP decrease by >30% from baseline for a short and a prolonged duration, respectively. In an adjusted analysis, neither a MAP <55 mm Hg (short duration: adjusted odds ratio [ORadj], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.07; P = .417 and prolonged duration: ORadj, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.91-1.55; P = .220) nor a MAP decrease >30% (short duration: ORadj, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.67-1.42; P = .883 and prolonged duration: ORadj, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.89-1.90; P = .176) was associated with early perioperative stroke. A high a priori stroke risk quantified based on preoperatively available risk factors (STRAS prediction score) was associated with longer intraoperative hypotension (adjusted incidence rate ratio, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.04-1.05; P < .001 per 5 points of the STRAS prediction score). CONCLUSIONS: This study found no evidence to conclude that intraoperative hypotension within the range studied was associated with early perioperative stroke within 7 days after surgery. These findings emphasize the importance of perioperative cerebral blood flow autoregulation to prevent ischemic stroke.

Neurophysiologic Intraoperative Monitoring for Spine Surgery: A Practical Guide From Past to Present.

Intraoperative neuromonitoring was introduced in the second half of the 20th century with the goal of preventing patient morbidity for patients undergoing complex operations of the central and peripheral nervous system. Since its early use for scoliosis surgery, the growth and utilization of IOM techniques expanded dramatically over the past 50 years to include spinal tumor resection and evaluation of cerebral ischemia. The importance of IOM has been broadly acknowledged, and in 1989, the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) released a statement that the use of SSEPs should be standard-of-care during spine surgery. In 2012, both the AAN and the American Clinical Neurophysiology Society (ACNS) recommended that: "Intraoperative monitoring (IOM) using SSEPs and transcranial MEPs be established as an effective means of predicting an increased risk of adverse outcomes, such as paraparesis, paraplegia, and quadriplegia, in spinal surgery." With a multimodal approach that combines SSEPs, MEPs, and sEMG with tEMG and D waves, as appropriate, sensitivity and specificity can be maximized for the diagnosis of reversible insults to the spinal cord, nerve roots, and peripheral nerves. As with most patient safety efforts in the operating room, IOM requires contributions from and communication between a number of different teams. This comprehensive review of neuromonitoring techniques for surgery on the central and peripheral nervous system will highlight the technical, surgical and anesthesia factors required to optimize outcomes. In addition, this review will discuss important trouble shooting measures to be considered when managing ION changes concerning for potential injury.

Is Compliance With Surgical Care Improvement Project Cardiac (SCIP-Card-2) Measures for Perioperative ß-Blockers Associated With Reduced Incidence of Mortality and Cardiovascular-Related Critical Quality Indicators After Noncardiac Surgery?

BACKGROUND: While continuation of ß-blockers (BBs) perioperatively has become a national quality improvement measure, the relationship between BB withdrawal and mortality and cardiovascular-related critical quality indicators has not been studied in a contemporary cohort of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. METHODS: For this retrospective study, the quality assurance database of a large community-based anesthesiology group practice was used to identify 410,288 surgical cases, 18 years of age or older, who underwent elective or emergent noncardiac surgical procedures between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014. Each surgical case that was withdrawn from BBs perioperatively was propensity matched by clinical and surgical characteristics to 4 cases that continued BBs perioperatively. Subsequently, multivariable conditional logistic regression analyses were performed in the matched cohort to determine the extent to which withdrawal of perioperative BBs was independently associated with mortality as the primary outcome and cardiovascular-related critical quality indicators as the secondary outcome (need for vasopressor, electrocardiographic changes requiring treatment, unplanned admission to intensive care unit, postanesthesia care unit stay >2 hours, and a combination of cardiac arrest and myocardial infarction) within 48 hours postoperatively. RESULTS: Of the 66,755 (16%) cases in the cohort admitted on BB therapy, BBs were withdrawn in 3829 (6%) and continued in 62,926 (94%). Propensity score matching resulted in an analysis cohort of 19,145 cases. Withdrawal of perioperative BBs in the multivariable conditional logistic regression analysis was significantly associated with an increased risk for mortality (odds ratio [OR], 3.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.75-7.35; P = .0003), but a significantly decreased risk for need of blood pressure support requiring vasopressor initiation (OR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.92; P = .0003) and extended postanesthesia care unit stay (OR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.54-0.88; P = .004) within 48 hours after noncardiac surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperative withdrawal of BBs was associated with increased risk for mortality within 48 hours after noncardiac surgery and with decreased risk for need of vasopressor during the early postoperative period and a shorter stay in the postanesthesia care unit.