Perioperative management of patients declining transfusions of blood components-National survey of anaesthesiologists, abdominal surgeons and obstetricians in Denmark.

Perioperative management of patients declining transfusions of blood products can be challenging both ethically and clinically. Jehovah's Witnesses (JW) decline treatment with blood products and have published a list of interventions they might accept as substitutes. No detailed documentation of available substitute interventions at Danish hospitals exists. Likewise, no national guidelines exist on how to optimise patients who refuse to receive treatment with blood products. The primary aim was to investigate which treatments are currently available to healthcare professionals in Denmark when treating patients who refuse transfusion of blood components. Additionally, we wanted to investigate how many departments have local guidelines for treatment for this group of patients. Based on our findings we would suggest potential improvements in the treatment of patients declining transfusion of blood components. Consultants from Danish departments of anaesthesiology, abdominal surgery and obstetrics were invited to participate in a nationwide cross-sectional online survey. The questionnaire explored available interventions offered perioperatively. Respondents were all on-call consultants. The questionnaire underwent content, face and technical validation during pilot testing. Ninety-six of 108 (89%) respondents from 55 departments completed the questionnaire. Thirty-five (36%) respondents reported having a departmental guideline mostly dealing with judicial aspects regarding patients declining transfusions with blood, and 34 (35%) would in collaboration with other professionals make an interdisciplinary strategy for patients declining transfusions with blood. For patients declining treatment with blood products in anticoagulant treatment, and hence with a greater risk of bleeding, reverting treatment is essential. Depending on the type of anticoagulant, between 31 (32%) and 59 (60%) of respondents reported locally available guidelines for reverting anticoagulant treatments. We found a considerable variation and limited availability of interventions to minimise blood loss in patients declining transfusion of blood components. This scarcity of local guidelines together with the considerable variation of available treatment documented in our survey could possibly be enhanced by a lack of national guidelines.

Waking Up in Pain: a prospective unselected cohort study of pain in 3702 patients immediately after surgery in the Danish Realm.

BACKGROUND: Acute and persistent pain after surgery is well described. However, no large-scale studies on immediate postoperative pain in the operating room (OR) exist, hindering potential areas of research to improve clinical outcomes. Thus, we aimed to describe the occurrence and severity of immediate postoperative pain in a large, unselected cohort. METHODS: This was a prospective cohort study, encompassing all procedures in 31 public hospitals in the Danish Realm, during a 5-day period including the weekend. Data on procedures and anesthesia were collected and the main outcome was occurrence of moderate or severe pain in the OR. Secondary outcomes included pain, sedation and nausea in the OR or during the first 15 min in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) including relevant risk factors. Descriptive and logistic regression statistics were used. RESULTS: A total of 3675 procedures were included for analysis (87% inclusion rate). Moderate or severe pain occurred in 7.4% (95% CI 6.5% to 8.3%) of cases in the OR immediately after awakening, rising to 20.2% in the OR and/or PACU. Large intraprocedure and interprocedure variations occurred (0.0%-37.5%), and in 20% of cases with epidural-general anesthesia patients experienced moderate or severe pain. Independent risk factors were female sex, younger age, preoperative pain, daily opioid use and major surgical procedures. CONCLUSION: Moderate or severe pain in the immediate postoperative phase occurred in 20% of all cases with procedure and anesthesiological technique variations, suggesting a need for identification of relevant procedure-specific risk factors and development of preventive treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: RoPR ID 43191.