Development and evaluation of a novel pre-operative surgery school and behavioural change intervention for patients undergoing elective major surgery: Fit-4-Surgery School.

Group pre-operative education has usually been limited to conditioning expectations and providing education. Prehabilitation has highlighted modifiable lifestyle factors that are amenable to change and may improve clinical outcomes. We instituted a pre-operative 'Fit-4-Surgery School' for patients scheduled for major surgery, to educate and promote healthy behaviour. We evaluated patients' views having attended the school, and after surgery we asked how it had changed their behaviour with a lifestyle questionnaire. The school was launched in May 2016 and was attended by 586/1017 (58%) of invited patients. Patients who did not attend: lived further away, median (IQR [range]) 8 (4-19 [0-123]) miles vs. 5 (3-14 [0-172]) miles, p < 0.001; and were more deprived, Index of Multiple Deprivation Rank decile median (IQR [range]), 6 (4-8 [1-10]) vs. 7 (4-9 [1-10]), p = 0.04. Of the 492/586 (84%) participants who completed an evaluation questionnaire, 462 (94%) would recommend the school to a friend having surgery and 296 (60%) planned lifestyle changes. After surgery, 232/586 (40%) completed a behavioural change questionnaire, 106 (46%) of whom reported changing at least one lifestyle factor, most commonly by increasing exercise. The pre-operative school was acceptable to patients.

Why women are not small men: sex-related differences in perioperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing.

BACKGROUND: The use of preoperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) to evaluate the risk of adverse perioperative outcomes is increasingly prevalent. CPET-derived information enables personalised perioperative care and enhances shared decision-making. Sex-related differences in physical fitness are reported in non-perioperative literature. However, little attention has been paid to sex-related differences in the context of perioperative CPET. AIM: We explored differences in the physical fitness variables reported in a recently published multi-centre study investigating CPET before colorectal surgery. We also report the inclusion rate of females in published perioperative CPET cohorts that are shaping guidelines and clinical practice. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the trial data of 703 patients who underwent CPET prior to major elective colorectal surgery. We also summarised the female inclusion rate in peer-reviewed published reports of perioperative CPET. RESULTS: Fitness assessed using commonly used perioperative CPET variables-oxygen consumption at anaerobic threshold (AT) and peak exercise-was significantly higher in males than in females both before and after correction for body weight. In studies contributing to the development of perioperative CPET, 68.5% of the participants were male. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to describe differences between males and females in CPET variables used in a perioperative setting. Furthermore, there is a substantial difference between the inclusion rates of males and females in this field. These findings require validation in larger cohorts and may have significant implications for both sexes in the application of CPET in the perioperative setting.

Exercise prehabilitation may lead to augmented tumor regression following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer.

  Purpose: We evaluate the effect of an exercised prehabilitation programme on tumour response in rectal cancer patients following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT). Patients and Methods: Rectal cancer patients with (MRI-defined) threatened resection margins who completed standardized NACRT were prospectively studied in a post hoc, explorative analysis of two previously reported clinical trials. MRI was performed at Weeks 9 and 14 post-NACRT, with surgery at Week 15. Patients undertook a 6-week preoperative exercise-training programme. Oxygen uptake (VO2) at anaerobic threshold (AT) wasmeasured at baseline (pre-NACRT), after completion of NACRT and at week 6 (post-NACRT). Tumour related outcome variables: MRI tumour regression grading (ymrTRG) at Week 9 and 14; histopathological T-stage (ypT); and tumour regression grading (ypTRG)) were compared. Results: 35 patients (26 males) were recruited. 26 patients undertook tailored exercise-training with 9 unmatched controls. NACRT resulted in a fall in VO2 at AT -2.0 ml/kg-1/min-1(-1.3,-2.6), p < 0.001. Exercise was shown to reverse this effect. VO2 at AT increased between groups, (post-NACRT vs. week 6) by +1.9 ml/kg-1/min-1(0.6, 3.2), p = 0.007. A significantly greater ypTRG in the exercise group at the time of surgery was found (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Following completion of NACRT, exercise resulted in significant improvements in fitness and augmented pathological tumour regression.

Peri-operative care pathways: re-engineering care to achieve the 'triple aim'.

Elective surgical pathways offer a particular opportunity to plan radical change in the way care is delivered, based on patient need rather than provider convenience. Peri-operative pathway redesign enables improved patient experience of care (including quality and satisfaction), population/public health, and healthcare value (outcome per unit of currency). Among physicians with the skills to work within peri-operative medicine, anaesthetists are well positioned to lead the re-engineering of such pathways. Re-engineered pre-operative pathways open up opportunities for intervention before surgery including shared decision-making, comorbidity management and collaborative behavioural change. Individualised, risk-adapted, intra-operative interventions will drive more reliable and consistent care. Risk-adapted postoperative care, particularly around transitions of care, has a significant role in improving value through peri-operative medicine. Improved integration with primary care providers offers the potential for minimising errors around transitions of care before and after surgery, as well as maximising opportunities for population health interventions, including lifestyle modification (e.g. activity/exercise, smoking and/or alcohol cessation), pain management and sleep medicine. Systematic data collection focused on quality improvement is essential to drive continuous clinical improvement and will be enabled by technological development in predictive analytics, systems modelling and artificial intelligence.

A systematic review of the safety and efficacy of aerobic exercise during cytotoxic chemotherapy treatment.

PURPOSE: Aerobic exercise improves prognosis and quality of life (QoL) following completion of chemotherapy. However, the safety and efficacy of aerobic exercise during chemotherapy is less certain. A systematic review was performed of randomised trials of adult patients undergoing chemotherapy, comparing an exercise intervention with standard care. METHOD: From 253 abstracts screened, 33 unique trials were appraised in accordance with PRISMA guidance, including 3257 patients. Interventions included walking, jogging or cycling, and 23 were of moderate intensity (50-80% maximum heart rate). RESULTS: Aerobic exercise improved, or at least maintained fitness during chemotherapy. Moderately intense exercise, up to 70-80% of maximum heart rate, was safe. Any reported adverse effects of exercise were mild and self-limiting, but reporting was inconsistent. Adherence was good (median 72%). Exercise improved QoL and physical functioning, with earlier return to work. Two out of four studies reported improved chemotherapy completion rates. Four out of six studies reported reduced chemotherapy toxicity. There was no evidence that exercise reduced myelosuppression or improved response rate or survival. CONCLUSIONS: Exercise during chemotherapy is safe and should be encouraged because of beneficial effects on QoL and physical functioning. More research is required to determine the impact on chemotherapy completion rates and prognosis.

Inter-observer reliability of preoperative cardiopulmonary exercise test interpretation: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the increasing importance of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) for preoperative risk assessment, the reliability of CPET interpretation is unclear. We aimed to assess inter-observer reliability of preoperative CPET. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, multi-centre, observational study of preoperative CPET interpretation. Participants were professionals with previous experience or training in CPET, assessed by a standardized questionnaire. Each participant interpreted 100 tests using standardized software. The CPET variables of interest were oxygen consumption at the anaerobic threshold (AT) and peak oxygen consumption (VO2 peak). Inter-observer reliability was measured using intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) with a random effects model. Results are presented as ICC with 95% confidence interval, where ICC of 1 represents perfect agreement and ICC of 0 represents no agreement. RESULTS: Participants included 8/28 (28.6%) clinical physiologists, 10 (35.7%) junior doctors, and 10 (35.7%) consultant doctors. The median previous experience was 140 (inter-quartile range 55-700) CPETs. After excluding the first 10 tests (acclimatization) for each participant and missing data, the primary analysis of AT and VO2 peak included 2125 and 2414 tests, respectively. Inter-observer agreement for numerical values of AT [ICC 0.83 (0.75-0.90)] and VO2 peak [ICC 0.88 (0.84-0.92)] was good. In a post hoc analysis, inter-observer agreement for identification of the presence of a reportable AT was excellent [ICC 0.93 (0.91-0.95)] and a reportable VO2 peak was moderate [0.73 (0.64-0.80)]. CONCLUSIONS: Inter-observer reliability of interpretation of numerical values of two commonly used CPET variables was good (>80%). However, inter-observer agreement regarding the presence of a reportable value was less consistent.

Perioperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET): consensus clinical guidelines on indications, organization, conduct, and physiological interpretation.

The use of perioperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) to evaluate the risk of adverse perioperative events and inform the perioperative management of patients undergoing surgery has increased over the last decade. CPET provides an objective assessment of exercise capacity preoperatively and identifies the causes of exercise limitation. This information may be used to assist clinicians and patients in decisions about the most appropriate surgical and non-surgical management during the perioperative period. Information gained from CPET can be used to estimate the likelihood of perioperative morbidity and mortality, to inform the processes of multidisciplinary collaborative decision making and consent, to triage patients for perioperative care (ward vs critical care), to direct preoperative interventions and optimization, to identify new comorbidities, to evaluate the effects of neoadjuvant cancer therapies, to guide prehabilitation and rehabilitation, and to guide intraoperative anaesthetic practice. With the rapid uptake of CPET, standardization is key to ensure valid, reproducible results that can inform clinical decision making. Recently, an international Perioperative Exercise Testing and Training Society has been established (POETTS www.poetts.co.uk) promoting the highest standards of care for patients undergoing exercise testing, training, or both in the perioperative setting. These clinical cardiopulmonary exercise testing guidelines have been developed by consensus by the Perioperative Exercise Testing and Training Society after systematic literature review. The guidelines have been endorsed by the Association of Respiratory Technology and Physiology (ARTP).

Perioperative structure and process quality and safety indicators: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Clinical indicators assess healthcare structures, processes, and outcomes. While used widely, the exact number and level of scientific evidence of these indicators remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the number, type, and evidence base of clinical process and structure indicators currently available for quality and safety measurement in perioperative care. METHODS: We performed a systematic review searching Medline, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Cochrane, Google Scholar, and System for Information in Grey Literature in Europe databases for English language human studies in adults (age >18) published in the past 10 years (January 2005-January 2016). We also included professional and governmental body publications and guidelines describing the development, validation, and use of structure and process indicators in perioperative care. RESULTS: We identified 43 860 journal articles and 43 relevant indicator program publications. From these, we identified a total of 1282 clinical indicators, split into structure (36%, n=463) and process indicators (64%, n=819). The dimensions of quality most frequently addressed were effectiveness (38%, n=475) and patient safety (29%, n=363). The majority of indicators (53%, n=675) did not have a level of evidence ascribed in their literature. Patient-centred metrics accounted for the fewest published clinical indicators. CONCLUSIONS: Despite widespread use, the majority of clinical indicators are not based on a strong level of scientific evidence. There may be scope in setting standards for the development and validation process of clinical indicators. Most indicators focus on the effectiveness, safety, and efficiency of care. PROSPERO DATABASE: CRD4201501277.

Fit for surgery? Perspectives on preoperative exercise testing and training.

There is a consistent relationship between physical activity, physical fitness, and health across almost all clinical contexts, including the perioperative setting. Physiological measurements obtained during physical exercise may be used to infer the risk of adverse outcome after major surgery. In particular, data obtained from perioperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing have an expanding role in perioperative care. Such information may be used to inform a variety of changes in clinical practice, including interventions that may reduce the risk of perioperative adverse events. Specifically, for patients undergoing major cancer surgery there is a complex interplay between different cancer treatments, including neoadjuvant therapies (chemo- and chemo- plus radiotherapy), surgery, and physical fitness, and the modulation of these relationships by perioperative exercise interventions. Preoperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing provides an objective evaluation of physical fitness and has been used to provide an individualized risk profile in order to guide collaborative decision-making, inform the consent process, characterize and optimize co-morbidities, and to triage patients to perioperative care. Furthermore, studies evaluating exercise interventions aimed at increasing preoperative exercise capacity have established that training improves physical fitness. However, to date, this literature is largely composed of feasibility and pilot studies with small sample sizes, which are in general underpowered to assess clinical outcomes. Adequately powered prospective multicentre studies are needed to characterize the most effective means of improving patient fitness before surgery and to evaluate the impact of such improvements on surgical and disease-specific (e.g. cancer) outcomes.

Differences between patients' and clinicians' research priorities from the Anaesthesia and Peri-operative Care Priority Setting Partnership.

The James Lind Alliance Anaesthesia and Peri-operative Care Priority Setting Partnership was a recent collaborative venture bringing approximately 2000 patients, carers and clinicians together to agree priorities for future research into anaesthesia and critical care. This secondary analysis compares the research priorities of 303 service users, 1068 clinicians and 325 clinicians with experience as service users. All three groups prioritised research to improve patient safety. Service users prioritised research about improving patient experience, whereas clinicians prioritised research about clinical effectiveness. Clinicians who had experience as service users consistently prioritised research more like clinicians than like service users. Individual research questions about patient experience were more popular with patients and carers than with clinicians in all but one case. We conclude that patients, carers and clinicians prioritise research questions differently. All groups prioritise research into patient safety, but service users also favour research into patient experience, whereas clinicians favour research into clinical effectiveness.

Cohort study of preoperative blood pressure and risk of 30-day mortality after elective non-cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative blood pressure (BP) thresholds associated with increased postoperative mortality remain unclear. We investigated the relationship between preoperative BP and 30-day mortality after elective non-cardiac surgery. METHODS: We performed a cohort study of primary care data from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (2004-13). Parsimonious and fully adjusted multivariable logistic regression models, including restricted cubic splines for numerical systolic and diastolic BP, for 30-day mortality were constructed. The full model included 29 perioperative risk factors, including age, sex, comorbidities, medications, and surgical risk scale. Sensitivity analyses were conducted for age (>65 vs <65 years old) and the timing of BP measurement. RESULTS: A total of 251 567 adults were included, with 589 (0.23%) deaths within 30 days of surgery. After adjustment for all risk factors, preoperative low BP was consistently associated with statistically significant increases in the odds ratio (OR) of postoperative mortality. Statistically significant risk thresholds started at a preoperative systolic pressure of 119 mm Hg (adjusted OR 1.02 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.02]) compared with the reference (120 mm Hg) and diastolic pressure of 63 mm Hg [OR 1.24 (95% CI 1.03-1.49)] compared with the reference (80 mm Hg). As BP decreased, the OR of mortality risk increased. Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the risk associated with low BP was confined to the elderly. Adjusted analyses identified that diastolic hypertension was associated with increased postoperative mortality in the whole cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In this large observational study we identified a significant dose-dependent association between low preoperative BP values and increased postoperative mortality in the elderly. In the whole population, elevated diastolic, not systolic, BP was associated with increased mortality.

Total haemoglobin mass, but not haemoglobin concentration, is associated with preoperative cardiopulmonary exercise testing-derived oxygen-consumption variables.

Background: Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) measures peak exertional oxygen consumption ( V˙O2peak ) and that at the anaerobic threshold ( V˙O2 at AT, i.e. the point at which anaerobic metabolism contributes substantially to overall metabolism). Lower values are associated with excess postoperative morbidity and mortality. A reduced haemoglobin concentration ([Hb]) results from a reduction in total haemoglobin mass (tHb-mass) or an increase in plasma volume. Thus, tHb-mass might be a more useful measure of oxygen-carrying capacity and might correlate better with CPET-derived fitness measures in preoperative patients than does circulating [Hb]. Methods: Before major elective surgery, CPET was performed, and both tHb-mass (optimized carbon monoxide rebreathing method) and circulating [Hb] were determined. Results: In 42 patients (83% male), [Hb] was unrelated to V˙O2 at AT and V˙O2peak ( r =0.02, P =0.89 and r =0.04, P =0.80, respectively) and explained none of the variance in either measure. In contrast, tHb-mass was related to both ( r =0.661, P <0.0001 and r =0.483, P =0.001 for V˙O2 at AT and V˙O2peak , respectively). The tHb-mass explained 44% of variance in V˙O2 at AT ( P <0.0001) and 23% in V˙O2peak ( P =0.001). Conclusions: In contrast to [Hb], tHb-mass is an important determinant of physical fitness before major elective surgery. Further studies should determine whether low tHb-mass is predictive of poor outcome and whether targeted increases in tHb-mass might thus improve outcome.

The future of UK healthcare: problems and potential solutions to a system in crisis.

The UK's Health System is in crisis, central funding no longer keeping pace with demand. Traditional responses-spending more, seeking efficiency savings or invoking market forces-are not solutions. The health of our nation demands urgent delivery of a radical new model, negotiated openly between public, policymakers and healthcare professionals. Such a model could focus on disease prevention, modifying health behaviour and implementing change in public policy in fields traditionally considered unrelated to health such as transport, food and advertising. The true cost-effectiveness of healthcare interventions must be balanced against the opportunity cost of their implementation, bolstering the central role of NICE in such decisions. Without such action, the prognosis for our healthcare system-and for the health of the individuals it serves-may be poor. Here, we explore such a new prescription for our national health.

Transfusion in critical care - a UK regional audit of current practice.

A consistent message within critical care publications has been that a restrictive transfusion strategy is non-inferior, and possibly superior, to a liberal strategy for stable, non-bleeding critically ill patients. Translation into clinical practice has, however, been slow. Here, we describe the degree of adherence to UK best practice guidelines in a regional network of nine intensive care units within Wessex. All transfusions given during a 2-month period were included (n = 444). Those given for active bleeding or within 24 h of major surgery, trauma or gastrointestinal bleeding were excluded (n = 148). The median (IQR [range]) haemoglobin concentration before transfusion was 73 (68-77 [53-106]) g.l-1 , with only 34% of transfusion episodes using a transfusion threshold of < 70 g.l-1 . In a subgroup analysis that did not study patients with a history of cardiac disease (n = 42), haemoglobin concentration before transfusion was 72 (68-77 [50-98]) g.l-1 , with only 36% of transfusion episodes using a threshold of < 70 g.l-1 (see Fig. 3). Most blood transfusions given to critically ill patients who were not bleeding in this audit used a haemoglobin threshold > 70 g.l-1 . The reason why recommendations on transfusion triggers have not translated into clinical practice is unclear. With a clear national drive to decrease usage of blood products and clear evidence that a threshold of 70 g.l-1 is non-inferior, it is surprising that a scarce and potentially dangerous resource is still being overused within critical care. Simple solutions such as electronic patient records that force pause for thought before blood transfusion, or prescriptions that only allow administration of a single unit in non-emergency circumstances may help to reduce the incidence of unnecessary blood transfusions.