Development of a Core Outcome Set for studies evaluating the effects of anaesthesia on perioperative morbidity and mortality following hip fracture surgery.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative studies of patients following hip fracture have large heterogeneity within their reported outcomes. This study aimed to develop a core outcome set for use in perioperative studies comparing the types of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. METHODS: The consensus process consisted of a systematic review of the literature, three rounds of a Delphi survey, two consensus webinars, and face-to-face patient meetings. RESULTS: The Delphi participants represented nine stakeholder groups. The numbers of participants completing Rounds 1-3 were 242, 186, and 169, respectively. Seventeen outcomes that met the predefined consensus criteria were considered at two consensus meetings. A final set of 10 core outcomes was agreed: mortality, time from injury to surgery, acute coronary syndrome, hypotension, acute kidney injury, delirium, pneumonia, orthogeriatric input, being out of bed at day 1, and pain. CONCLUSIONS: We generated a consensus-based set of core outcomes recommended for use in all perioperative trials evaluating the effects of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. An important next step is developing consensus-based consistency on how they should be measured. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.comet-initiative.org/studies/details/757.

Perioperative outcomes in the context of mode of anaesthesia for patients undergoing hip fracture surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Previous meta-analyses on the anaesthetic management of patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture have focused on randomized trials. Furthermore, heterogeneity in outcome reporting across the studies has made it difficult to inform best practice guidelines for patient care. METHODS: This systematic review examined how perioperative outcomes were reported and defined in the context of comparing modes of anaesthesia for hip fracture surgery. Outcomes were included from randomised and non-randomised studies published between January 2000 and July 2017. Meta-analyses were performed for regional versus general anaesthesia, with sensitivity analyses performed for spinal versus general anaesthesia. RESULTS: By including data from 15 large observational studies in this meta-analysis, we have increased the number of patients for whom outcomes were assessed from approximately 3000 to 202 000. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality (OR 1.02; 95% CI 0.96, 1.07, I2 31%; n=200 616), prevalence of pneumonia (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.94, 1.23, I2 34%; n=65 011), acute myocardial infarction (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.88, 1.04, I2 0%, n=64 904), delirium (OR 1.07; 95% CI 0.72, 1.58, I2 93%, n=19 923), or renal failure (OR 0.94; 95% CI 0.54, 1.64, I2 0%, n=27 873) for regional compared with general anaesthesia [corrected]. There was a small statistically significant difference for length of stay (standardized mean difference -0.03; 95% CI -0.05, -0.02; I2 0%; n=78 711) favouring regional anaesthesia, which is unlikely to be clinically significant. Sensitivity analyses for the same outcomes examining spinal only vs general anaesthesia showed minor statistical significance for length of stay favouring spinal. We also present data highlighting the scale of the inconsistencies in reported outcomes across 32 studies, making evaluation in a standardized manner very difficult. As an example, mortality was reported in nine different ways throughout the studies. CONCLUSIONS: We highlight the need for agreement on outcome definitions and for a minimum core outcome set to be measured and reported in hip fracture studies. This would strengthen the evidence-based approach to delivering optimal care.

Management of 'Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation' (DNACPR) decisions in the perioperative period.

It is increasingly common for patients to be scheduled for anaesthesia and surgery with a 'Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation' (DNACPR) decision in place. Updated guidelines for the implementation and management of DNACPR decisions were published jointly by the British Medical Association (BMA), the Resuscitation Council (UK) and the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) in 2014 (BMA, RC(UK), RCN 2014). The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland (AAGBI) published specific guidelines in 2009 to guide the perioperative management of such patients (AAGBI 2009). In this article, we explain these guidelines with a focus on how DNACPR decisions are made and how they can be modified in order to permit appropriate surgery to take place.

Previously undiagnosed aortic stenosis revealed by auscultation in the hip fracture population--echocardiographic findings, management and outcome.

The 2001 Report of the National Confidential Enquiry into Perioperative Deaths recommended that an echocardiogram should be performed on patients with aortic stenosis prior to anaesthesia. In this study we present the patient details, management and outcome of the 272 hip fracture patients with a previously undiagnosed murmur and echocardiographically proven aortic stenosis admitted from 2001-2005 in our hospital. The patients with aortic stenosis were significantly older, and had significantly lower Abbreviated Mental Test Scores, than the control group of 3698 hip fracture patients without aortic stenosis. There were significant trends toward general anaesthesia over spinal anaesthesia, and use of invasive monitoring of blood pressure, as the severity of the aortic stenosis increased. There were no significant trends towards higher 30-day or 1-year mortality rates as the severity of the aortic stenosis increased. Resources for rapid pre-operative echocardiograms should be made available for hip fracture patients as the results have significant implications for their subsequent anaesthetic management.

Anticipation and planning for anaesthesia provision within MR units in the UK.

We surveyed 33 UK MR units that have been developed by New Opportunity Funding (NOF) with reference to planning for and provision of anaesthetic services. The likely clinical and resource implications were documented. Units were developed predominantly in acute general hospitals with paediatric, critically ill and neuroscience patients represented. It may be predicted that up to 50% of newly built units will require anaesthetic provision and this should be anticipated at the planning stage. A senior anaesthetist should be involved in the planning process.