Codesign of health technology interventions to support best-practice perioperative care and surgical waitlist management.

OBJECTIVES: This project aimed to determine where health technology can support best-practice perioperative care for patients waiting for surgery. METHODS: An exploratory codesign process used personas and journey mapping in three interprofessional workshops to identify key challenges in perioperative care across four health districts in Sydney, Australia. Through participatory methodology, the research inquiry directly involved perioperative clinicians. In three facilitated workshops, clinician and patient participants codesigned potential digital interventions to support perioperative pathways. Workshop output was coded and thematically analysed, using design principles. RESULTS: Codesign workshops, involving 51 participants, were conducted October to November 2022. Participants designed seven patient personas, with consumer representatives confirming acceptability and diversity. Interprofessional team members and consumers mapped key clinical moments, feelings and barriers for each persona during a hypothetical perioperative journey. Six key themes were identified: 'preventative care', 'personalised care', 'integrated communication', 'shared decision-making', 'care transitions' and 'partnership'. Twenty potential solutions were proposed, with top priorities a digital dashboard and virtual care coordination. DISCUSSION: Our findings emphasise the importance of interprofessional collaboration, patient and family engagement and supporting health technology infrastructure. Through user-based codesign, participants identified potential opportunities where health technology could improve system efficiencies and enhance care quality for patients waiting for surgical procedures. The codesign approach embedded users in the development of locally-driven, contextually oriented policies to address current perioperative service challenges, such as prolonged waiting times and care fragmentation. CONCLUSION: Health technology innovation provides opportunities to improve perioperative care and integrate clinical information. Future research will prototype priority solutions for further implementation and evaluation.

Can equity in care be achieved for stigmatized patients? Discourses of ideological dilemmas in perioperative care.

BACKGROUND: In the perioperative care of individuals with obesity, it is imperative to consider the presence of risk factors that may predispose them to complications. Providing optimal care in such cases proves to be a multifaceted challenge, significantly distinct from the care required for non-obese patients. However, patients with morbidities regarded as self-inflicted, such as obesity, described feelings of being judged and discriminated in healthcare. At the same time, healthcare personnel express difficulties in acting in an appropriate and non-insulting way. In this study, the aim was to analyse how registered nurse anaesthetists positioned themselves regarding obese patients in perioperative care. METHODS: We used discursive psychology to analyse how registered nurse anaesthetists positioned themselves toward obese patients in perioperative care, while striving to provide equitable care. The empirical material was drawn from interviews with 15 registered nurse anaesthetists working in a hospital in northern Sweden. RESULTS: Obese patients were described as "untypical", and more "resource-demanding" than for the "normal" patient in perioperative care. This created conflicting feelings, and generated frustration directed toward the patients when the care demanded extra work that had not been accounted for in the schedules created by the organization and managers. CONCLUSIONS: Although the intention of these registered nurse anaesthetists was to offer all patients equitable care, the organization did not always provide the necessary resources. This contributed to the registered nurse anaesthetists either consciously or unconsciously blaming patients who deviated from the "norm".

Preoperative Assessment of a Patient Undergoing Bariatric Surgery.

Over the past few decades, obesity rates in the United States have risen drastically, and with this, there has been a rising demand for bariatric surgery. As such, anesthesiologists need to be familiar with the challenges presented by patients seeking bariatric surgery. Obesity causes pathophysiologic changes which may affect decision-making during the management of these patients. Patients seeking bariatric surgery also have a long, prescribed preoperative course that offers anesthesiologists the opportunity to be involved earlier during the pre-surgical evaluation and optimization process.

Value-Based Health Care in Perioperative Medicine: Process Maps and Costing to Determine Best Practices.

Perioperative care in the United States is largely based on current fee-for-service models. Fee-for-service models are not based on the true cost of services provided, charges do not equal costs, and reimbursement varies based on insurer. Value-based health care is defined as patient-centered outcomes over cost of providing these services. Process mapping and time-driven activity-based costing can be used to define actual cost of services provided. Outcomes after discharge can be measured, so that the overall value of care provided can be assessed and improved based on the outcomes and costs identified.

Reducing the Burden of Disease Associated With Periprosthetic Fractures: Prevention and the Need for Improved Perioperative Care.

The management of periprosthetic fractures remains challenging and controversial. There continues to be a significant burden of disease and substantial resource implications associated with fractures following total joint arthroplasty. Achieving consensus opinions regarding the prevention and treatment of this problem has important implications given the profound effect on patient outcomes. Multidisciplinary care in the preoperative and postoperative settings is critical, with a specific focus on bone health.

Children's Anaesthesia and perioperative care challenges, and innovations.

The 2015 Sustainable Development Goals emphasise good health to all with reduced inequalities, and surgical and anaesthesia care is essential to achieve these. https://sdgs.un.org/goals. However, it has been estimated that 1.7 billion children do not have access to safe anaesthesia and surgery when needed and this disproportionately affects children in low- and middle-income countries (1). It is alarming that 1 in 10 individuals in LMICs do not have access to safe surgical care. Both safe surgery and anaesthesia are essential for ensuring that individuals receive proper medical attention. Economically viable public health initiatives that can avert many disability-adjusted years are needed. (2-4) Morbidity and mortality from surgical disease and anaesthesia care remain high in low-income countries, unlike in high-income countries. The incidence of severe anaesthesia-related critical events and perioperative cardiac arrest is between three and ten times more in LMICs than in HICs (5-7) A baseline POMR that is 100 times higher in LMICs compared to HICs is reported. (8) This perioperative morbidity and mortality gap is more evident in neonates and younger age groups, especially in children with congenital abnormalities. The challenges facing providers of anaesthesia and perioperative care are multifactorial and include but are not limited to the inadequate workforce, inadequate and inappropriate infrastructure, lack of adequate and appropriately sized equipment, including monitors, and safe monitoring capacity, supply chain challenges for medicines and reusable consumables, unreliable supply of oxygen and blood products, lack of data and research for policy formulation, inadequate resource allocation from governments and lack of safety culture among other things. In paediatrics, this is further multiplied by the variability in the sizes of the patients, from neonates to older children (9).

Delivery of Safe Pediatric Anesthesia Care in the First 8000 days: Realities, Challenges, and Solutions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

BACKGROUND: Worldwide, perioperative mortality has declined over the past 50 years, but the reduction is skewed toward high-income countries (HICs). Currently, pediatric perioperative mortality is much higher in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) compared to HICs, despite studied cohorts being predominantly low-risk. These disparities must be studied and addressed. METHODS: A narrative review of the literature was undertaken to identify contributing factors and potential knowledge gaps. Interventions aimed at alleviating the outcomes disparities are discussed, and recommendations are made for future directions. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: There is a lack of adequately trained pediatric anesthesia providers in LMICs, and the number must be bolstered by making such training available. Essential anesthesia medications and equipment, in pediatric-appropriate sizes, are often not available; neither are essential infrastructure items. Perioperative staff are underprepared for emergent situations that may arise and simulation training may help to ameliorate this. The global anesthesia community has implemented several solutions to address these issues. The World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA) and Global Initiative for Children's Surgery have published standards that outline essential items for the provision of safe perioperative pediatric care. Several short educational courses have been developed and introduced in LMICs that either specifically address pediatric patients, or contain a pediatric component. The WFSA also maintains a collection of discrete tutorials for educational purposes. Finally, in Africa, large-scale, prospective data collection is underway to examine pediatric perioperative outcomes. More work needs to be done, though, to improve perioperative outcomes for pediatric patients in LMICs.

Perioperative outcome assessment from the perspectives of different stakeholders: need for reconsideration?

Standardised and universal perioperative endpoint reporting are the cornerstone for outcomes assessment, reliable clinical trials, and health services research. The Outcome4medicine initiative recently reported consensus recommendations on how to assess the quality of surgical interventions, proposing a framework for surgical outcome assessment and quality improvement after medical interventions. In the same field, the Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine - Core Outcome Measures for Perioperative and Anaesthetic Care (StEP-COMPAC) group recently proposed standardised and valid measures of mortality and morbidity, derived from a three-stage Delphi process. Here a core group of the Outcome4medicine conference discusses how these two initiatives are aligned and emphasises the importance of standardised outcome assessment by integrating the perspectives of different stakeholders.

Is a preoperative multidisciplinary team meeting (cost)effective to improve outcome for high-risk adult patients undergoing noncardiac surgery: the PREPARATION study-a multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: As a result of increased life expectancy and improved care for patients suffering from chronic disease, the number of patients with multimorbidity requiring surgical intervention is increasing. For complex surgical patients, it is essential to balance the potential benefits of surgical treatment against the risk of permanent loss of functional capacity and quality of life due to complications. European and US guidelines on perioperative care recommend preoperative multidisciplinary team (MDT) discussions for high-risk noncardiac surgical patients. However, the evidence underlying benefits from preoperative MDT meetings with all relevant perioperative specialties present is limited. The current study aims to investigate the effect of implementation of preoperative MDT discussions for high-risk patients undergoing noncardiac surgery on serious adverse events. METHODS/DESIGN: PREPARATION is a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in 14 Dutch hospitals without currently established preoperative MDT meeting. The intervention, preoperative MDT meetings, will be implemented sequentially with seven blocks of 2 hospitals switching from control (preoperative screening as usual) to the intervention every 3 months. Each hospital will be randomized to one of seven blocks. We aim to include 1200 patients. The primary outcome is the incidence of serious adverse events at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include (cost)effectiveness, functional outcome, and quality of life for up to 12 months. DISCUSSION: PREPARATION is the first study to assess the effectiveness of a preoperative MDT meeting for high-risk noncardiac surgical patients in the presence of an anesthesiologist. If the results suggest that preoperative MDT discussions for high-risk patients are (cost)-effective, the current study facilitates implementation of preoperative MDT meetings in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05703230. Registered on 11/09/2022.

Cardiovascular assessment for non-cardiac surgery: updated European guidelines.

The 2022 European Society of Cardiology guidelines on cardiovascular assessment and management of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery are intended for physicians involved in the perioperative care of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery, in whom heart disease is a potential source of complications. While relevant and useful, the length of the guidelines may limit widespread reading. This article summarises the guidelines, highlighting the aspects most relevant to medical staff preparing patients for surgery.

Evidence-based Perioperative Practice Utilization among Various Racial Populations-A Retrospective Cohort Trending Analysis of Lower Extremity Total Joint Arthroplasty Patients.

BACKGROUND: Various studies have demonstrated racial disparities in perioperative care and outcomes. The authors hypothesize that among lower extremity total joint arthroplasty patients, evidence-based perioperative practice utilization increased over time among all racial groups, and that standardized evidence-based perioperative practice care protocols resulted in reduction of racial disparities and improved outcomes. METHODS: The study analyzed 3,356,805 lower extremity total joint arthroplasty patients from the Premier Healthcare database (Premier Healthcare Solutions, Inc., USA). The exposure of interest was race (White, Black, Asian, other). Outcomes were evidence-based perioperative practice adherence (eight individual care components; more than 80% of these implemented was defined as "high evidence-based perioperative practice"), any major complication (including acute renal failure, delirium, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, respiratory failure, stroke, or in-hospital mortality), in-hospital mortality, and prolonged length of stay. RESULTS: Evidence-based perioperative practice adherence rate has increased over time and was associated with reduced complications across all racial groups. However, utilization among Black patients was below that for White patients between 2006 and 2021 (odds ratio, 0.94 [95% CI, 0.93 to 0.95]; 45.50% vs. 47.90% on average). Independent of whether evidence-based perioperative practice components were applied, Black patients exhibited higher odds of major complications (1.61 [95% CI, 1.55 to 1.67] with high evidence-based perioperative practice; 1.43 [95% CI, 1.39 to 1.48] without high evidence-based perioperative practice), mortality (1.70 [95% CI, 1.29 to 2.25] with high evidence-based perioperative practice; 1.29 [95% CI, 1.10 to 1.51] without high evidence-based perioperative practice), and prolonged length of stay (1.45 [95% CI, 1.42 to 1.48] with high evidence-based perioperative practice; 1.38 [95% CI, 1.37 to 1.40] without high evidence-based perioperative practice) compared to White patients. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-based perioperative practice utilization in lower extremity joint arthroplasty has been increasing during the last decade. However, racial disparities still exist with Black patients consistently having lower odds of evidence-based perioperative practice adherence. Black patients (compared to the White patients) exhibited higher odds of composite major complications, mortality, and prolonged length of stay, independent of evidence-based perioperative practice use, suggesting that evidence-based perioperative practice did not impact racial disparities regarding particularly the Black patients in this surgical cohort.

Perioperative risk assessment.

Perioperative risk assessment refers to estimating a patient's risk of adverse outcomes in the perioperative period.