Association Between Anesthesiologist Sex and Patients' Postoperative Outcomes: A Population-based Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of anesthesiologist sex on postoperative outcomes. BACKGROUND: Differences in patient postoperative outcomes exist, depending on whether the primary surgeon is male or female, with better outcomes seen among patients treated by female surgeons. Whether the intraoperative anesthesiologist's sex is associated with differential postoperative patient outcomes is unknown. METHODS: We performed a population-based, retrospective cohort study among adult patients undergoing one of 25 common elective or emergent surgical procedures from 2007 to 2019 in Ontario, Canada. We assessed the association between the sex of the intraoperative anesthesiologist and the primary end point of the adverse postoperative outcome, defined as death, readmission, or complication within 30 days after surgery, using generalized estimating equations. RESULTS: Among 1,165,711 patients treated by 3006 surgeons and 1477 anesthesiologists, 311,822 (26.7%) received care from a female anesthesiologist and 853,889 (73.3%) from a male anesthesiologist. Overall, 10.8% of patients experienced one or more adverse postoperative outcomes, of whom 1.1% died. Multivariable adjusted rates of the composite primary end point were higher among patients treated by male anesthesiologists (10.6%) compared with female anesthesiologists (10.4%; adjusted odds ratio 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00-1.05, P =0.048). CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated a significant association between sex of the intraoperative anesthesiologist and patient short-term outcomes after surgery in a large cohort study. This study supports the growing literature of improved patient outcomes among female practitioners. The underlying mechanisms of why outcomes differ between male and female physicians remain elusive and require further in-depth study.

A model to predict level of adherence to prehabilitation in older adults with frailty having cancer surgery.

PURPOSE: Preoperative exercise could improve postoperative outcomes for people with frailty; however, little is known about how to predict older people's adherence to exercise before surgery (i.e., prehabilitation) programs. Our objective was to derive and validate a model to predict prehabilitation adherence in older adults living with frailty before cancer surgery. METHODS: This was a nested prospective cohort study of older adults with frailty having cancer surgery who participated in a randomized controlled trial of home-based prehabilitation compared with standard perioperative care. We constructed a multivariable ordinary least squares linear regression model to predict adherence. Covariates were selected a priori based on clinical expertise and systematic review. Optimism was estimated through internal validation using bootstrap resampling. RESULTS: The derivation cohort consisted of 95 participants in the intervention arm of the trial. Percent adherence ranged from 0% to 100%, with a mean (standard deviation) of 61 (34)%. Previous physical activity and age were the only predictors significant at the 5% level. CONCLUSION: A prespecified multivariable model may help to explain a modest degree of variation in prehabilitation adherence in older people with frailty. While this model is an important step toward personalizing prehabilitation support, this study was limited by a small sample size and future research is needed to better understand personalized prediction of prehabilitation adherence in older people with frailty.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'exercice préopératoire pourrait améliorer les issues postopératoires pour les personnes fragilisées; cependant, on ne sait que peu de choses sur la façon de prédire l'observance des personnes âgées à faire de l'exercice avant leur chirurgie (c.-à-d. à suivre des programmes de préadaptation). Notre objectif était de définir et de valider un modèle pour prédire l'observance de la préadaptation chez les personnes âgées fragilisées avant une chirurgie oncologique. MéTHODE: Il s'agissait d'une étude de cohorte prospective imbriquée auprès de personnes âgées fragilisées subissant une chirurgie oncologique qui ont participé à une étude randomisée contrôlée sur la préadaptation à domicile par rapport aux soins périopératoires standard. Nous avons construit un modèle de régression linéaire des moindres carrés ordinaires multivariés pour prédire l'observance. Les covariables ont été sélectionnées a priori sur la base de notre expertise clinique et d'une revue systématique. L'optimisme a été estimé par validation interne à l'aide d'une méthode de rééchantillonnage type « bootstrap ¼. RéSULTATS: La cohorte de dérivation comprenait 95 participant·es dans le volet intervention de l'étude. Le pourcentage d'observance variait de 0 % à 100 %, avec une moyenne (écart type) de 61 (34) %. L'activité physique antérieure et l'âge étaient les seuls prédicteurs significatifs au seuil de 5 %. CONCLUSION: Un modèle multivarié prédéfini peut aider à expliquer un degré modeste de variation dans l'observance de la préadaptation chez les personnes âgées fragilisées. Bien que ce modèle soit une étape importante vers la personnalisation du soutien à la préadaptation, cette étude a été limitée par un échantillon de petite taille; des recherches futures sont nécessaires pour mieux comprendre la prédiction personnalisée de l'observance de la préadaptation chez les personnes âgées fragilisées.

Barriers and facilitators to participation in exercise prehabilitation before cancer surgery for older adults with frailty: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults with frailty are at an increased risk of adverse outcomes after surgery. Exercise before surgery (exercise prehabilitation) may reduce adverse events and improve recovery after surgery. However, adherence with exercise therapy is often low, especially in older populations. The purpose of this study was to qualitatively assess the barriers and facilitators to participating in exercise prehabilitation from the perspective of older people with frailty participating in the intervention arm of a randomized trial. METHODS: This was a research ethics approved, nested descriptive qualitative study within a randomized controlled trial of home-based exercise prehabilitation vs. standard care with older patients (≥ 60 years) having elective cancer surgery, and who were living with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale ≥ 4). The intervention was a home-based prehabilitation program for at least 3 weeks before surgery that involved aerobic activity, strength and stretching, and nutritional advice. After completing the prehabilitation program, participants were asked to partake in a semi-structured interview informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Qualitative analysis was guided by the TDF. RESULTS: Fifteen qualitative interviews were completed. Facilitators included: 1) the program being manageable and suitable to older adults with frailty, 2) adequate resources to support engagement, 3) support from others, 4) a sense of control, intrinsic value, noticing progress and improving health outcomes and 5) the program was enjoyable and facilitated by previous experience. Barriers included: 1) pre-existing conditions, fatigue and baseline fitness, 2) weather, and 3) guilt and frustration when unable to exercise. A need for individualization and variety was offered as a suggestion by participants and was therefore described as both a barrier and facilitator. CONCLUSIONS: Home-based exercise prehabilitation is feasible and acceptable to older people with frailty preparing for cancer surgery. Participants identified that a home-based program was manageable, easy to follow with helpful resources, included valuable support from the research team, and they reported self-perceived health benefits and a sense of control over their health. Future studies and implementation should consider increased personalization based on health and fitness, psychosocial support and modifications to aerobic exercises in response to adverse weather conditions.

Home-based prehabilitation with exercise to improve postoperative recovery for older adults with frailty having cancer surgery: the PREHAB randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a state of vulnerability as a result of decreased reserves. Prehabilitation may increase reserve and improve postoperative outcomes. Our objective was to determine if home-based prehabilitation improves postoperative functional recovery in older adults with frailty having cancer surgery. METHODS: This double blind randomised trial enrolled people ≥60 yr having elective cancer surgery and ≥3 weeks from enrolment to surgery as eligible. Participation in a remotely supported, home-based exercise prehabilitation program plus nutritional guidance was compared with standard care plus written advice on age-appropriate activity and nutrition. The primary outcome was 6-min walk test (6MWT) distance at the first postoperative clinic visit. Secondary outcomes included physical performance, quality of life, disability, length of stay, non-home discharge, and 30-day readmission. RESULTS: Of 543 patients assessed, 254 were eligible and 204 (80%) were randomised (102 per arm); 182 (94 intervention and 88 control) had surgery and were analysed. Mean age was 74 yr and 57% were female. Mean duration of participation was 5 weeks, mean adherence was 61% (range 0%-100%). We found no significant difference in 6MWT at follow-up (+14 m, 95% confidence interval -26-55 m, P=0.486), or for secondary outcomes. Analyses using a prespecified adherence definition of ≥80% supported improvements in 6MWT distance, complication count, and disability. CONCLUSIONS: A home-based prehabilitation program did not significantly improve postoperative recovery or other outcomes in older adults with frailty having cancer surgery. Program adherence may be a key mediator of prehabilitation efficacy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02934230.

Development and evaluation of an evidence-based, theory-grounded online Clinical Frailty Scale tutorial.

INTRODUCTION: Frailty is a robust predictor of adverse outcomes in older people. Practice guidelines recommend routine screening for frailty; however, this does not occur regularly. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a validated, feasible instrument that can be used in a variety of clinical settings and is associated with many adverse outcomes. Our objective was to develop and evaluate an online training module to guide frailty assessment using the CFS. METHODS: A multidisciplinary team of clinical experts developed an evidence-based, theory-grounded online training module for users who wished to perform frailty assessment using the CFS. The module was prospectively evaluated for user satisfaction, effectiveness and feasibility using a standardised questionnaire. Qualitative feedback was analysed with thematic analysis. RESULTS: Version 1 of the CFS module was used 627 times from 21 October 2019 to 24 March 2020. Satisfaction, effectiveness and feasibility of the module were positively rated (≥4/5 on a 5-point Likert scale n = 582 [93%], n = 507, [81%], n = 575, [91%], respectively). Qualitative feedback highlighted ease of use, likelihood of users to share the module with others and opportunities to increase multimedia content. CONCLUSION: An online tutorial, designed using evidence and theory to guide frailty assessment using the CFS, was positively rated by users. The module's content and structure was rated effective and feasible, and users were satisfied with, and likely to share, the module. Research evaluating the module's impact on the accuracy of frailty assessment is required.

Hospital-, anaesthetist-, and patient-level variation in peripheral nerve block utilisation for hip fracture surgery: a population-based cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Unwarranted variation in anaesthesia practice is associated with adverse outcomes. Despite high-certainty evidence of benefit, a minority of hip fracture surgery patients receive a peripheral nerve block. Our objective was to estimate variation in peripheral nerve block use at the hospital, anaesthetist, and patient levels, while identifying predictors of peripheral nerve block use in hip fracture patients. METHODS: After protocol registration (https://osf.io/48bvp/), we conducted a population-based cross-sectional study using linked administrative data in Ontario, Canada. We included adults >65 yr of age having emergency hip fracture surgery from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2018. Logistic mixed models were used to estimate the variation in peripheral nerve block use attributable to hospital-, anaesthetist-, and patient-level factors with use of peripheral nerve block, quantified using the variance partition coefficient and median odds ratio. Predictors of peripheral nerve block use were estimated and temporally validated. RESULTS: Of 50 950 patients, 9144 (18.5%) received a peripheral nerve block within 1 day of surgery. Patient-level factors accounted for 14% of variation, whereas 42% and 44% were attributable to the hospital and anaesthetist providing care, respectively. The median odds ratio for receiving a peripheral nerve block was 5.73 at the hospital level and 5.97 at the anaesthetist level. No patient factors had large associations with receipt of a peripheral nerve block (odds ratios significant at the 5% level ranged from 0.86 to 1.35). CONCLUSIONS: Patient factors explain the minimal variation in peripheral nerve block use for hip fracture surgery. Interventions to increase uptake of peripheral nerve blocks for hip fracture patients will likely need to focus on structures and processes at the hospital and anaesthetist levels.

Post-discharge after surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring-1 (PVC-RAM-1) technology versus standard care: randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if virtual care with remote automated monitoring (RAM) technology versus standard care increases days alive at home among adults discharged after non-elective surgery during the covid-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 8 acute care hospitals in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 905 adults (≥40 years) who resided in areas with mobile phone coverage and were to be discharged from hospital after non-elective surgery were randomised either to virtual care and RAM (n=451) or to standard care (n=454). 903 participants (99.8%) completed the 31 day follow-up. INTERVENTION: Participants in the experimental group received a tablet computer and RAM technology that measured blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, temperature, and body weight. For 30 days the participants took daily biophysical measurements and photographs of their wound and interacted with nurses virtually. Participants in the standard care group received post-hospital discharge management according to the centre's usual care. Patients, healthcare providers, and data collectors were aware of patients' group allocations. Outcome adjudicators were blinded to group allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was days alive at home during 31 days of follow-up. The 12 secondary outcomes included acute hospital care, detection and correction of drug errors, and pain at 7, 15, and 30 days after randomisation. RESULTS: All 905 participants (mean age 63.1 years) were analysed in the groups to which they were randomised. Days alive at home during 31 days of follow-up were 29.7 in the virtual care group and 29.5 in the standard care group: relative risk 1.01 (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.02); absolute difference 0.2% (95% confidence interval -0.5% to 0.9%). 99 participants (22.0%) in the virtual care group and 124 (27.3%) in the standard care group required acute hospital care: relative risk 0.80 (0.64 to 1.01); absolute difference 5.3% (-0.3% to 10.9%). More participants in the virtual care group than standard care group had a drug error detected (134 (29.7%) v 25 (5.5%); absolute difference 24.2%, 19.5% to 28.9%) and a drug error corrected (absolute difference 24.4%, 19.9% to 28.9%). Fewer participants in the virtual care group than standard care group reported pain at 7, 15, and 30 days after randomisation: absolute differences 13.9% (7.4% to 20.4%), 11.9% (5.1% to 18.7%), and 9.6% (2.9% to 16.3%), respectively. Beneficial effects proved substantially larger in centres with a higher rate of care escalation. CONCLUSION: Virtual care with RAM shows promise in improving outcomes important to patients and to optimal health system function. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04344665.

Persistent Postoperative Opioid Prescription Fulfillment and Peripheral Nerve Blocks for Ambulatory Shoulder Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: There is need to identify perioperative interventions that decrease chronic opioid use. The authors hypothesized that receipt of a peripheral nerve block would be associated with a lower incidence of persistent postoperative opioid prescription fulfillment. METHODS: This was a retrospective population-based cohort study examining ambulatory shoulder surgery patients in Ontario, Canada. The main outcome measure was persistent postoperative opioid prescription fulfillment. In opioid-naive patients (no opioid prescription fulfillment in 90 days preoperatively), this was present if an individual fulfilled an opioid prescription of at least a 60-day supply during postoperative days 90 to 365. In opioid-exposed (less than 60 mg oral morphine equivalent dose per day within 90 days preoperatively) or opioid-tolerant (60 mg oral morphine equivalent dose per day or above within 90 days preoperatively) patients, this was classified as present if an individual experienced any increase in opioid prescription fulfillment from postoperative day 90 to 365 relative to their baseline use before surgery. The authors' exposure was the receipt of a peripheral nerve block. RESULTS: The authors identified 48,523 people who underwent elective shoulder surgery from July 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017, at one of 118 Ontario hospitals. There were 8,229 (17%) patients who had persistent postoperative opioid prescription fulfillment. Of those who received a peripheral nerve block, 5,008 (16%) went on to persistent postoperative opioid prescription fulfillment compared to 3,221 (18%) patients who did not (adjusted odds ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.97; P = 0.007). This statistically significant observation was not reproduced in a coarsened exact matching sensitivity analysis (adjusted odds ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.71 to 1.02; P = 0.087) or several other subgroup and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective analysis found no association between receipt of a peripheral nerve block and a lower incidence of persistent postoperative opioid prescription fulfillment in ambulatory shoulder surgery patients.

Post Discharge after Surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring Technology (PVC-RAM): protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: After nonelective (i.e., semiurgent, urgent and emergent) surgeries, patients discharged from hospitals are at risk of readmissions, emergency department visits or death. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we are undertaking the Post Discharge after Surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring Technology (PVC-RAM) trial to determine if virtual care with remote automated monitoring (RAM) compared with standard care will increase the number of days adult patients remain alive at home after being discharged following nonelective surgery. METHODS: We are conducting a randomized controlled trial in which 900 adults who are being discharged after nonelective surgery from 8 Canadian hospitals are randomly assigned to receive virtual care with RAM or standard care. Outcome adjudicators are masked to group allocations. Patients in the experimental group learn how to use the study's tablet computer and RAM technology, which will measure their vital signs. For 30 days, patients take daily biophysical measurements and complete a recovery survey. Patients interact with nurses via the cellular modem-enabled tablet, who escalate care to preassigned and available physicians if RAM measurements exceed predetermined thresholds, patients report symptoms, a medication error is identified or the nurses have concerns they cannot resolve. The primary outcome is number of days alive at home during the 30 days after randomization. INTERPRETATION: This trial will inform management of patients after discharge following surgery in the COVID-19 pandemic and offer insights for management of patients who undergo nonelective surgery in a nonpandemic setting. Knowledge dissemination will be supported through an online multimedia resource centre, policy briefs, presentations, peer-reviewed journal publications and media engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04344665.

Is Supraclavicular Block as Good as Interscalene Block for Acute Pain Control Following Shoulder Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Interscalene block (ISB) is the acute pain management technique of choice for shoulder surgery, but its undesirable respiratory side effects have prompted seeking alternatives. Supraclavicular block (SCB) is proposed as an ISB alternative, but evidence of comparative analgesic and respiratory-sparing effects is inconsistent. We compared the analgesic and respiratory effects of SCB and ISB for shoulder surgery. METHODS: Trials comparing ISB to SCB for shoulder surgery were sought. We decided a priori that SCB would be an acceptable alternative if it were noninferior for (1) postoperative 24-hour cumulative oral morphine equivalent consumption (primary outcome, noninferiority margin Δ = -25 mg) and (2) postoperative pain (secondary outcome, noninferiority margin Δ = 4.0 cm·hour); and superior for (3) postblock respiratory dysfunction (primary outcome). Opioid-related side effects and block-related complications were also evaluated. RESULTS: Fifteen studies (1065 patients) were analyzed. In single-injection blocks, SCB was noninferior to ISB for 24-hour morphine consumption (mean difference for SCB-ISB, MD [95% confidence interval {CI}] = -3.11 mg [-9.42 to 3.19], Δ = -25 mg); it was also noninferior for 24-hour pain scores (MD = 0.78 cm·hour [0.07-1.49], Δ = 4.0 cm·hour); and decreased the odds of respiratory dysfunction (odds ratio [OR] [95% CI] = 0.08 [0.01-0.68]). Similarly, in continuous blocks, SCB was noninferior to ISB for 24-hour morphine consumption (MD = 0.46 mg [-6.08 to 5.15], Δ = -25 mg), and decreased the odds of respiratory dysfunction (OR = 0.22 [0.08-0.57]). SCB also decreased odds of minor block-related complications (OR = 0.36 [0.20-0.68] and OR = 0.25 [0.15-0.41] for single-injection and continuous blocks, respectively). Consequently, the null joint-hypothesis was rejected, and SCB can be considered an acceptable alternative to ISB. CONCLUSIONS: For acute pain control following shoulder surgery, high-quality evidence indicates that SCB can be used as an effective ISB alternative. SCB is noninferior for postoperative opioid consumption and acute pain, and it reduces the odds of postblock respiratory dysfunction.

A Population-based Comparative Effectiveness Study of Peripheral Nerve Blocks for Hip Fracture Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Adverse outcomes and resource use rates are high after hip fracture surgery. Peripheral nerve blocks could improve outcomes through enhanced analgesia and decreased opioid related adverse events. We hypothesized that these benefits would translate into decreased resource use (length of stay [primary outcome] and costs), and better clinical outcomes (pneumonia and mortality). METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of hip fracture surgery patients in Ontario, Canada (2011 to 2015) using linked health administrative data. Multilevel regression, instrumental variable, and propensity scores were used to determine the association of nerve blocks with resource use and outcomes. RESULTS: The authors identified 65,271 hip fracture surgery patients; 10,030 (15.4%) received a block. With a block, the median hospital stay was 7 (interquartile range, 4 to 13) days versus 8 (interquartile range, 5 to 14) days without. Following adjustment, nerve blocks were associated with a 0.6-day decrease in length of stay (95% CI, 0.5 to 0.8). This small difference was consistent with instrumental variable (1.1 days; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.2) and propensity score (0.2 days; 95% CI, 0.2 to 0.3) analyses. Costs were lower with a nerve block (adjusted difference, -$1,421; 95% CI, -$1,579 to -$1,289 [Canadian dollars]), but no difference in mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.11) or pneumonia (adjusted odds ratio, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.16) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of nerve blocks for hip fracture surgery is associated with decreased length of stay and health system costs, although small effect sizes may not reflect clinical significance for length of stay.

Pectoralis-II Myofascial Block and Analgesia in Breast Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic paravertebral block is the preferred regional anesthetic technique for breast cancer surgery, but concerns over its invasiveness and risks have prompted search for alternatives. Pectoralis-II block is a promising analgesic technique and potential alternative to paravertebral block, but evidence of its absolute and relative effectiveness versus systemic analgesia (Control) and paravertebral block, respectively, is conflicting. This meta-analysis evaluates the analgesic effectiveness of Pectoralis-II versus Control and paravertebral block for breast cancer surgery. METHODS: Databases were searched for breast cancer surgery trials comparing Pectoralis-II with Control or paravertebral block. Postoperative oral morphine consumption and difference in area under curve for pooled rest pain scores more than 24 h were designated as coprimary outcomes. Opioid-related side effects, effects on long-term outcomes, such as chronic pain and opioid dependence, were also examined. Results were pooled using random-effects modeling. RESULTS: Fourteen randomized trials (887 patients) were analyzed. Compared with Control, Pectoralis-II provided clinically important reductions in 24-h morphine consumption (at least 30.0 mg), by a weighted mean difference [95% CI] of -30.5 mg [-42.2, -18.8] (P < 0.00001), and in rest pain area under the curve more than 24 h, by -4.7cm · h [-5.1, -4.2] or -1.2cm [-1.3, -1.1] per measurement. Compared with paravertebral block, Pectoralis-II was not statistically worse (not different) for 24-h morphine consumption, and not clinically worse for rest pain area under curve more than 24 h. No differences were observed in opioid-related side effects or any other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We found that Pectoralis-II reduces pain intensity and morphine consumption during the first 24 h postoperatively when compared with systemic analgesia alone; and it also offers analgesic benefits noninferior to those of paravertebral block after breast cancer surgery. Evidence supports incorporating Pectoralis-II into multimodal analgesia and also using it as a paravertebral block alternative in this population.

Peripheral Nerve Blocks for Ambulatory Shoulder Surgery: A Population-based Cohort Study of Outcomes and Resource Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Nerve blocks improve early pain after ambulatory shoulder surgery; impact on postdischarge outcomes is poorly described. Our objective was to measure the association between nerve blocks and health system outcomes after ambulatory shoulder surgery. METHODS: We conducted a population-based cohort study using linked administrative data from 118 hospitals in Ontario, Canada. Adults having elective ambulatory shoulder surgery (open or arthroscopic) from April 1, 2009, to December 31, 2016, were included. After validation of physician billing codes to identify nerve blocks, we used multilevel, multivariable regression to estimate the association of nerve blocks with a composite of unplanned admissions, emergency department visits, readmissions or death within 7 days of surgery (primary outcome) and healthcare costs (secondary outcome). Neurology consultations and nerve conduction studies were measured as safety indicators. RESULTS: We included 59,644 patients; blocks were placed in 31,073 (52.1%). Billing codes accurately identified blocks (positive likelihood ratio 16.83, negative likelihood ratio 0.03). The composite outcome was not significantly different in patients with a block compared with those without (2,808 [9.0%] vs. 3,424 [12.0%]; adjusted odds ratio 0.96; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.03; P = 0.243). Healthcare costs were greater with a block (adjusted ratio of means 1.06; 95% CI 1.02 to 1.10; absolute increase $325; 95% CI $316 to $333; P = 0.005). Prespecified sensitivity analyses supported these results. Safety indicators were not different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In ambulatory shoulder surgery, nerve blocks were not associated with a significant difference in adverse postoperative outcomes. Costs were statistically higher with a block, but this increase is not likely clinically relevant.

Association of peripheral nerve blocks with postoperative outcomes in ambulatory shoulder surgery patients: a single-centre matched-cohort study.

PURPOSE: Regional anesthesia may have immediate postoperative advantages compared with general anesthesia, but its impact on post-discharge outcomes is poorly described. Our objective was to measure the association between regional anesthesia and outcomes after ambulatory shoulder surgery. METHODS: We conducted a historical cohort study at The Ottawa Hospital. Adults ≥ 18 yr old having elective ambulatory shoulder surgery from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2016 were included. Using one-to-many coarsened exact matching (CEM) to adjust for potential confounders, we matched peripheral nerve block (PNB) patients to those without a PNB. Within the matched cohort, we assessed whether PNBs were associated with our primary composite outcomes, comprising unplanned admissions, emergency department visits, readmissions, or death within 30 days of surgery. RESULTS: There were 1,623 patients who met the inclusion criteria; PNBs were placed in 1,382 (85.2%) patients. CEM matched 211 patients who did not receive a PNB to 950 patients with similar characteristics who did receive a PNB (n = 1,161; 71.5% of total cohort). In patients who received a PNB compared with those who had no PNB, there was no difference in risk of composite outcome (relative risk, 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83 to 3.01), or hospital costs (ratio of means 0.73; 95% CI, 0.21 to 2.49). CONCLUSION: Peripheral nerve blocks in ambulatory shoulder surgery were not associated with a significant difference in a composite of adverse postoperative outcomes. Nevertheless, given the lower than expected incidence and moderate effect size associating PNBs with post-discharge events, future large prospective trials are needed to assess post-discharge outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03309644). Registered 13 October 2017.

Hospital-, Anesthesiologist-, and Patient-level Variation in Primary Anesthesia Type for Hip Fracture Surgery: A Population-based Cross-sectional Analysis.

WHAT WE ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THIS TOPIC: WHAT THIS MANUSCRIPT TELLS US THAT IS NEW: BACKGROUND:: Substantial variation in primary anesthesia type for hip fracture surgery exists. Previous work has demonstrated that patients cared for at hospitals using less than 20 to 25% neuraxial anesthesia have decreased survival. Therefore, the authors aimed to identify sources of variation in anesthesia type, considering patient-, anesthesiologist-, and hospital-level variables. METHODS: Following protocol registration (NCT02787031), the authors conducted a cross-sectional analysis of a population-based cohort using linked administrative data in Ontario, Canada. The authors identified all people greater than 65 yr of age who had emergency hip fracture surgery from April 2002 to March 2014. Generalized linear mixed models were used to account for hierarchal data and measure the adjusted association of hospital-, anesthesiologist-, and patient-level factors with neuraxial anesthesia use. The proportion of variation attributable to each level was estimated using variance partition coefficients and the median odds ratio for receipt of neuraxial anesthesia. RESULTS: Of 107,317 patients, 57,080 (53.2%) had a neuraxial anesthetic. The median odds ratio for receiving neuraxial anesthesia was 2.36 between randomly selected hospitals and 2.36 between randomly selected anesthesiologists. The majority (60.1%) of variation in neuraxial anesthesia use was explained by patient factors; 19.9% was attributable to the anesthesiologist providing care and 20.0% to the hospital where surgery occurred. The strongest patient-level predictors were absence of preoperative anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents, absence of obesity, and presence of pulmonary disease. CONCLUSIONS: While patient factors explain most of the variation in neuraxial anesthesia use for hip fracture surgery, 40% of variation is attributable to anesthesiologist and hospital-level practice. Efforts to change practice patterns will need to consider hospital-level processes and anesthesiologists' intentions and behaviors.

PREHAB study: a protocol for a prospective randomised clinical trial of exercise therapy for people living with frailty having cancer surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Exercise prehabilitation may improve outcomes after surgery. Frailty is a key predictor of adverse postoperative outcomes in older people; the multidimensional nature of frailty makes this a population who may derive substantial benefit from exercise prehabilitation. The objective of this trial is to test the efficacy of exercise prehabilitation to improve postoperative functional outcomes for people living with frailty having cancer surgery with curative intent. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a single-centre, parallel-arm randomised controlled trial of home-based exercise prehabilitation versus standard care among consenting patients >60 years having elective cancer surgery (intra-abdominal and intrathoracic) and who are frail (Clinical Frailty Scale >4). The intervention consists of > 3 weeks of exercise prehabilitation (strength, aerobic and stretching). The primary outcome is the 6 min walk test at the first postoperative clinic visit. Secondary outcomes include the short physical performance battery, health-related quality of life, disability-free survival, complications and health resource utilisation. The primary outcome will be analysed by intention to treat using analysis of covariance. Outcomes up to 1 year after surgery will be ascertained through linkage to administrative data. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted by our ethics review board (Protocol Approval #2016009-01H). Results will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences, through peer-reviewed publication, stakeholder organisations and engagement of social and traditional media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02934230; Pre-results.

Should thoracic paravertebral blocks be used to prevent chronic postsurgical pain after breast cancer surgery? A systematic analysis of evidence in light of IMMPACT recommendations.

The role of thoracic paravertebral block (PVB) in preventing chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) after breast cancer surgery (BCS) has gained interest, but existing evidence is conflicting, and its methodological quality is unclear. This meta-analysis evaluates efficacy of PVB, compared with Control group, in preventing CPSP after BCS, in light of the Initiative on Methods, Measurement, and Pain Assessment in Clinical Trials (IMMPACT) recommendations. Electronic databases were searched for randomized trials comparing PVB with Control group for CPSP prevention after BCS. Eligible trials were assessed for adherence to IMMPACT recommendations. The primary outcomes were CPSP at 3 and 6 months, whereas secondary outcomes were PVB-related complications. Data were pooled and analyzed using random-effects modelling. Trial sequential analysis was used to evaluate evidence conclusiveness. Data from 9 studies (604 patients) were analyzed. The median (range) of IMMPACT recommendations met in these trials was 9 (5, 15) of 21. Paravertebral block was not different from Control group in preventing CPSP at 3 months, but was protective at 6 months, with relative risk reduction (95% confidence interval) of 54% (0.24-0.88) (P = 0.02). Meta-regression suggested that the relative risk of CPSP was lower when single-injection (R = 1.00, P < 0.001) and multilevel (R = 0.71, P = 0.01) PVB were used. Trial sequential analysis revealed that 6-month analysis was underpowered by at least 312 patients. Evidence quality was moderate according to the GRADE system. Evidence suggests that multilevel single-injection PVB may be protective against CPSP at 6 months after BCS, but methodological limitations are present. Larger trials observing IMMPACT recommendations are needed to confirm this treatment effect and its magnitude.

Predictors of Prescription Opioid Use 4 Months After Traumatic Musculoskeletal Injury and Corrective Surgery: A Prospective Study.

The aim of the present study was to examine the incidence and predictors of persistent prescription opioid use 4 months after traumatic injury. Adults who sustained a traumatic musculoskeletal injury were recruited to participate in this observational prospective, longitudinal study within 14 days of injury (T1) and followed for 4 months (T2). Measures included questionnaires on pain, opioid consumption, pain disability, anxiety, depression, and posttraumatic stress symptoms as well as a chart review for injury related information. The sample consisted of 122 patients (66.4% male; mean age = 44.8 years, SD = 17.1), of whom 94.3% (n = 115) were using prescription opioids. At T2, 35.3% (n = 43) patients were using prescription opioids. After controlling for age, sex, injury severity, T1 pain severity, and T2 symptoms of depression, 2 factors emerged as significantly related to T2 prescription opioid use; namely, T2 pain severity (odds ratio = 1.248, 95% confidence interval, 1.071-1.742) and T2 pain self-efficacy (odds ratio = .943, 95% confidence interval, .903-.984). These results suggest that opioid use after traumatic musculoskeletal injury is related to pain severity and how well patients cope specifically with their pain, over and above other psychological factors, such as depression and anxiety. PERSPECTIVE: This article identifies predictive factors for prescription opioid use after traumatic musculoskeletal injury, namely severe pain and a poor sense of control over the pain. These results highlight the importance of using prospective longitudinal study designs to understand why patients continue to use prescription opioids after major tissue-damaging events.

Postoperative pain management after total knee arthroplasty in elderly patients: treatment options.

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a common surgical procedure in the elderly and is associated with severe pain after surgery and a high incidence of chronic pain. Several factors are associated with severe acute pain after surgery, including psychological factors and severe preoperative pain. Good acute pain control can be provided with multimodal analgesia, including regional anesthesia techniques. Studies have demonstrated that poor acute pain control after TKA is strongly associated with development of chronic pain, and this emphasizes the importance of attention to good acute pain control after TKA. Pain after discharge from hospital after TKA is currently poorly managed, and this is an area where increased resources need to be focused to improve early pain control. This is particularly as patients are often discharged home within 4-5 days after surgery. Chronic pain after TKA in the elderly can be managed with both pharmacological and non-pharmacological techniques. After excluding treatable causes of pain, the simplest approach is with the use of acetaminophen combined with a short course of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Careful titration of opioid analgesics can also be helpful with other adjuvants such as the antidepressants or antiepileptic medications used especially for patients with neuropathic pain. Topical agents may provide benefit and are associated with fewer systemic side effects than oral administration. Complementary or psychological therapies may be beneficial for those patients who have failed other options or have depression associated with chronic pain.