Transforming the perioperative medicine care model: The Singapore experience.

More than 300 million surgeries are performed worldwide annually. Established perioperative centres in the UK, USA and Australia have demonstrated the impact of improving perioperative care in reducing costs, increasing patient satisfaction and improving population health. Likewise, the surgical burden of care in Asia is increasing, but with sociocultural, economic and epigenetic differences compared to the west. As Singapore's largest hospital, the Singapore General Hospital pre-admission perioperative clinic sees about 20,000 patients annually. We aim to illustrate Singapore General Hospital's perioperative model of care to contribute to the paucity of literature describing perioperative programme implementation within Asia, and to encourage the cross-sharing of perioperative practices internationally. Our perioperative framework navigates risk assessment, risk counselling, and mitigation of health, medical and functional risks to better patients' perioperative outcomes and population health. We have implemented evidence-based pathways for common conditions such as anaemia and malnutrition, including a multidisciplinary programme for the elderly to tackle frailty and reduce length of stay. We describe how we have enhanced local risk profiling with the Combined Assessment of Risk Encountered in Surgery surgical risk calculator derived locally using a gradient boosting machine learning model. Finally, we report clinical outcomes of these interventions and discuss further challenges and new initiatives at each tier of our perioperative model. Our perioperative care model provides a framework that other centres can adopt to promote value-driven care, while catering for differences in the Asian population, thereby promoting evidence-based improvements in the area of perioperative medicine.

Preoperative Single-Dose Intravenous Iron Formulation to Reduce Postsurgical Complications in Patients Undergoing Major Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized Control Trial Feasibility Study (PIRCAS Trial Pilot).

Background Preoperative anemia is associated with an increased need for blood transfusion, complications, and prolonged hospital stay. Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) may be treated with oral or intravenous (IV) iron. IV iron repletes iron stores more rapidly. Its impact on perioperative blood transfusion, postoperative complications, patients' recovery, and long-term quality of life is unclear. Newer agents, such as ferric carboxymaltose (FCM), are costly but have higher maximum approved doses and a very low incidence of anaphylactic-type reactions. This study aims to explore the feasibility of a randomized control trial to compare the preoperative treatment of IDA with IV FCM versus oral ferrous fumarate, in patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery. Experimental design This is an open-label pilot randomized controlled trial. A total of 30 adults with IDA scheduled for elective major abdominal surgery were recruited for the study. They were randomized into two groups to receive either oral iron or IV FCM. Primary outcomes are defined as the time from enrollment to study drug administration, recruitment rate, and follow-up rate up to three months. Secondary outcomes are hemoglobin rise from recruitment to surgery, perioperative blood transfusion, postoperative complications, EQ-5D-3L scores at baseline, and three months and adverse events related to IV FCM therapy. Results All patients received study drugs within five days of enrollment; 30 patients were recruited within four months, 15 patients in each group. Two in each group were withdrawn for surgery postponement. All patients were followed up for three months and there was no crossover of patients. Per protocol, analysis was performed. No severe adverse events related to IV FCM therapy occurred. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics, similar hemoglobin rise from enrollment to the day of surgery [0.2 (+1.6) g/dL in the FCM group and 0.8 (+0.7) g/dL in the Oral Iron group, p=0.3] and similar mean units of perioperative blood transfused (recruitment to discharge) per patient [1.3 (+ 2.1) in the FCM group and 0.9 (+1.3) in the Oral Iron group, p=0.6]. Postoperatively, there was a similar hospital length of stay [11.5 (+13.6 days) in the FCM group and 9.0 (+9.8 days) in the Oral Iron group, p=0.6]; there were similar postoperative complications as reflected by the average Comprehensive Complication Index [12.8 (+19.6) in the FCM group and 22.6 (+30.7) in the Oral Iron group, p=0.3]; similar postoperative health-related quality of life as reflected by mean EQ-5D-3L scores at one month [70.4 (+21.8) in the FCM group and 84.5 (+12.1) in the Oral Iron group] and three months [80.0 (+18.4) in the FCM group and 85.9 (+10.7) in the Oral Iron group]. Conclusions A full-scale randomized controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of preoperative IV FCM compared to oral iron in patients with IDA undergoing major abdominal surgery is feasible.

Assessment of sensory neuropathy in diabetic patients without diabetic foot problems.

OBJECTIVES: To study the incidence and extent of peripheral sensory neuropathy in diabetic patients without diabetic foot problems (DFPs) with <5, 5-10 and >10 years duration of diabetes using three different modalities of testing: Pin-Prick Testing, 5.07 Semmes-Weinstein Monofilament Testing (SWMT) and Rapid-Current Perception Threshold (R-CPT) measurements using the Neurometer. METHODS: Our study population consisted of 60 patients (120 feet) treated for diabetes mellitus in the Division of Endocrinology at the National University Hospital. No patient had any DFPs. Twenty-two, 21 and 17 patients had duration of diabetes of <5, 5-10 and >10 years, respectively. All patients were tested for sensory neuropathy using Pin-Prick Testing using a standardized protocol, SWMT and the Neurometer. RESULTS: There was a significantly higher incidence of sensory neuropathy detected by both the Pin-Prick Test and the Neurometer as compared to the SWMT. Also, in all three modalities, there was a significant increase in incidence of sensory neuropathy detected in diabetics with >5 years duration of diabetes. In addition, the Pin-Prick Test showed an increase in extent of sensory neuropathy with a longer duration of diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: The Pin-Prick Test was found to be a simple, cheap and useful diagnostic tool for detection of sensory neuropathy in diabetics without DFPs. In addition, it could accurately delineate the extent of neuropathy in the lower limb - additional useful information not obtainable with SWMT or Neurometer. Even for patients with <5 years duration of diabetes, the incidence of sensory neuropathy detected was considerable. The incidence of neuropathy detected continued to increase with length of duration of diabetes. Hence, we recommend screening of patients for neuropathy as soon as they are diagnosed with diabetes.

Epidemiology of diabetic foot problems and predictive factors for limb loss.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the epidemiology of diabetic foot problems (DFP) and predictive factors for major amputations (below- and above-knee). METHODS: This is a prospective study of 202 patients treated in National University Hospital (NUH) during the period of January 2005 to May 2006. A protocol was designed for documentation including patient profile, type of DFP, presence of risk factors, comorbidities and complications, clinical presentation, investigations, treatment given, and final outcome. The predictors for limb loss were determined using univariate and stepwise logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: One hundred ninety-two patients had Type 2 diabetes. Mean age of cohort was 60 years, with male to female ratio of 1:1. Incidence of DFP was significantly higher in Malays (P=.0015) and Indians (P=.036) and significantly lower in Chinese (P<.05). Of patients, 72.8% had poor endocrine control (GHb level >7%), and 42.1% of patients had sensory neuropathy based on 5.07 Semmes-Weinstein Monofilament test. Common DFP included gangrene (31.7%), infection (abscess, osteomyelitis) (28.7%), ulcer (27.7%), cellulitis (6.4%), necrotizing fasciitis (3.5%) and Charcot's osteoarthropathy (2.0%). Surgery was performed in 74.8% of patients and major amputation in 27.2% of patients (below-knee in 20.3% and above-knee in 6.9%). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first detailed prospective study evaluating predictive factors for major amputations in patients with DFP. Significant univariate predictive factors for limb loss were age above 60 years, stroke, ischaemic heart disease, nephropathy, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), sensory neuropathy, glycosylated haemoglobin level, Ankle Brachial Index (ABI) <0.8, gangrene, infection, and pathogens such as methicillin-resistant Streptococcus aureus (MRSA) and Staphylococcus aereus. Upon stepwise logistic regression analysis, only PVD and infection were significant.