Perioperative immune function and pain control may underlie early hospital readmission and 90 day mortality following lung cancer resection: A prospective cohort study of 932 patients.

BACKGROUND: Mortality following lung cancer resection has been shown to double between 30 and 90 days and readmission following surgery is associated with an increased risk of mortality. The aim of this study was to describe the causes of readmission and mortality and enable the identification of potentially modifiable factors associated with these events. METHODS: Prospective cohort study at a United Kingdom tertiary referral centre conducted over 55 months. Binary logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with death within 90 days of surgery. RESULTS: The 30 day and 90 day mortality rates were 1.4% and 3.3% respectively. The most common causes of death were pneumonia, lung cancer and Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome/Multi Organ Failure. Potentially modifiable risk factors for death identified were: Postoperative pulmonary complications (Odds ratio 6.1), preoperative lymphocyte count (OR 0.25), readmission within 30 days (OR 4.2) and type of postoperative analgesia (OR for intrathecal morphine 4.8). The most common causes of readmission were pneumonia, shortness of breath and pain. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative mortality is not simply due to fixed factors; the impacts of age, gender and surgical procedure on postoperative survival are reduced when the postoperative course of recovery is examined. Perioperative immune function, as portrayed by the occurrence of infection and lower lymphocyte count in the immediate perioperative period, and pain control method are strongly associated with 90 day mortality; further studies in these fields are indicated as are studies of psychological factors in recovery. CLINICAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN00061628.

Risk factors and short-term outcomes of postoperative pulmonary complications after VATS lobectomy.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) are associated with poor outcomes following thoracotomy and lung resection. Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) for lobectomy is now frequently utilised as an alternative to thoracotomy, however patients remain at risk for development of PPC. There is little known of the short-term outcome associated with PPC following VATS lobectomy and if there are any potential risk factors that could be modified to prevent PPC development; our study aimed to investigate this. METHODS: A prospective observational study of consecutive patients undergoing VATS lobectomy for lung cancer over a 4-year period in a regional centre was performed (2012-2016). Exclusion criteria included re-do VATS or surgery for pulmonary infection. All patients received physiotherapy as necessary from postoperative day 1 (POD1) and PPC was determined using the Melbourne Group Scale. Outcomes included hospital LOS, intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission and hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of the 285 patients included in the study, 137 were male (48.1%), the median (IQR) age was 69 (13) years and the mean (±SD) FEV1% predicted was 87% (±19). Patients that developed a PPC (n = 21; 7.4%) had a significantly longer hospital LOS (4 vs. 3 days), higher frequency of ITU admission (23.8% vs. 0.5%) and higher hospital mortality (14.3% vs. 0%) (p < 0.001). PPC patients also required more physiotherapy contacts/time, emergency call-outs and specific pulmonary therapy (p < 0.05). Current smoking and COPD diagnosis were significantly associated with development of PPC on univariate analysis (p < 0.05), however only current smoking was a significant independent risk factor on multivariate analysis (p = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing VATS lobectomy remain at risk of developing a PPC, which is associated with an increase in physiotherapy requirements and a worse short-term morbidity and mortality. Current smoking is the only independent risk factor for PPC after VATS lobectomy, thus vigorous addressing of preoperative smoking cessation is urgently needed.

Smoking and timing of cessation on postoperative pulmonary complications after curative-intent lung cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Smoking is a risk factor for postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) following non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) surgery. The optimal timing for preoperative smoking cessation has not been identified. Our study aimed to observe the impact of preoperative smoking cessation on PPC incidence and other postoperative outcomes including long-term survival. METHODS: A prospective study included consecutive patients following resection for NSCLC in a regional thoracic centre over a 4-year period (2010-2014). Patients were stratified according to self-reported preoperative smoking status. The primary endpoint was PPC incidence, which was assessed from postoperative day one onwards using the Melbourne Group Scale. Secondary endpoints included short-term outcomes (hospital length of stay [LOS], intensive therapy unit [ITU] admission, 30-day hospital readmission rate) and long-term survival. RESULTS: Four hundred and sixty-two patients included 111 (24%) current smokers, 55 (12%) ex-smokers <6 weeks, 245 (53%) ex-smokers ≥6 weeks and 51 (11%) never smokers. PPC occurred in 60 (13%) patients in total. Compared to never smokers, current smokers had a higher frequency of PPC (22% vs. 2%, p = 0.004), higher frequency of ITU admission (14% vs. 0%; p = 0.001) and a longer median (IQR) hospital LOS (6 [5] vs. 5 [2]; p = 0.001). In the ex-smokers there was a trend for a lower frequency of PPC (<6 weeks, 10.9% vs. ≥6 weeks, 11.8%) and ITU admission (<6 weeks, 5.5% vs. ≥6 weeks, 4.5%), but there was no difference between the <6 weeks or ≥6 weeks ex-smoking groups prior to surgery. There was no significant difference in long-term survival found between the groups of differing smoking status (median follow-up 29.8 months, 95%CI 28.4-31.1). CONCLUSION: Current smokers have higher postoperative morbidity; this risk reduces following smoking cessation but 6 weeks does not appear to identify a time-point where differences in outcomes are noted.

Postoperative pulmonary complications and rehabilitation requirements following lobectomy: a propensity score matched study of patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery versus thoracotomy†.

OBJECTIVES: : Video-assisted thoracoscopic surgical (VATS) lobectomy is increasingly used for curative intent lung cancer surgery compared to open thoracotomy due to its minimally invasive approach and associated benefits. However, the effects of the VATS approach on postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC), rehabilitation and physiotherapy requirements are unclear; our study aimed to use propensity score matching to investigate this. METHODS: Between January 2012 and January 2016 all consecutive patients undergoing lobectomy via thoracotomy or VATS were prospectively observed. Exclusion criteria included VATS converted to thoracotomy, re-do thoracotomy, sleeve/bilobectomy and tumour size >7 cm diameter (T3/T4). All patients received physiotherapy assessment on postoperative day 1 (POD1), and subsequent treatment as deemed appropriate. PPC frequency was measured daily using the Melbourne Group Scale. Postoperative length of stay (LOS), high dependency unit (HDU) LOS, intensive therapy unit (ITU) admission and in-hospital mortality were observed. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed using previous PPC risk factors (age, ASA score, body mass index, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, current smoking) and lung cancer staging. RESULTS: Over 4 years 736 patients underwent lobectomy with 524 remaining after exclusions; 252 (48%) thoracotomy and 272 (52%) VATS cases. PSM produced 215 matched pairs. VATS approach was associated with less PPC (7.4% vs 18.6%; P < 0.001), shorter median LOS (4 days vs 6; P < 0.001), and a shorter median HDU LOS (1 day vs 2; P = 0.002). Patients undergoing VATS required less physiotherapy contacts (3 vs 6; P < 0.001) and reduced therapy time (80 min vs 140; P < 0.001). More patients mobilized on POD1 (84% vs 81%; P = 0.018), and significantly less physiotherapy to treat sputum retention and lung expansion was required ( P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that patients undergoing VATS lobectomy developed less PPC and had improved associated outcomes compared to thoracotomy. Patients were more mobile earlier, and required half the physiotherapy resources having fewer pulmonary and mobility issues.

Pectus patient information website has improved access to care and patient reported outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Pectus is the most common congenital disorder. Awareness amongst primary care physicians and the general public is poor. NHS commissioning bodies plan to withdraw funding for this surgery because they deem a lack of sufficient evidence of benefit. The purpose of this study is to assess the effects of introducing a patient information website on referral and activity patterns and on patients reported outcomes. METHODS: We produced an innovative information website, www.pectus.co.uk , accessible to the general public, providing information about pectus deformities; management options and advice about surgery. Referral patterns and number of cases where studied before and after the introduction of the website in 2010. Patients' satisfaction post-op was assessed using the Brompton's single step questionnaire (SSQ). RESULTS: The website had considerable traffic with 2179 hits in 2012, 4983 in 2013 and 7416 in 2014. This has led to 1421 contacts and 372 email enquiries. These emails have resulted in an increased number of patients who have been assessed and go on to have surgery. We asked 59 pectus excavatum patients who were operated from 2008 to 2014 to complete the SSQ. We received 32 replies. Eighty-four percent (16/19) of patients who visited the website and then underwent surgery, found the website useful. All patients scored satisfactorily in SSQ. Even though those who visited the website tended to be more satisfied with the surgical outcomes this did not reach statistical significance. This group of patients said that would have the operation again given the option compared to 76.9 % of the group who did not visit the website before surgery (p=0.031). Despite the fact that patients who visited the website experienced more post-operative complications were equally or more satisfied with post-operative outcomes. The overall SSQ obtainable score was not different for the two subgroups, being more widespread in the group that did not visit the website. CONCLUSIONS: The introduction of a pectus patient information website has significantly improved access to specialised services. Patients are overall highly satisfied with the surgical outcomes.

Long-term impact of developing a postoperative pulmonary complication after lung surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) such as atelectasis and pneumonia are common following lung resection. PPCs have a significant clinical impact on postoperative morbidity and mortality. We studied the long-term effects of PPCs and sought to identify independent risk factors. METHODS: A prospective observational study involved all patients following lung resection in a regional thoracic centre over 4 years. PPCs were assessed daily in hospital using the Melbourne group scale based on chest X-ray, white cell count, fever, purulent sputum, microbiology, oxygen saturations, physician diagnosis and intensive therapy unit (ITU)/high-dependency unit readmission. Follow-up included hospital length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmissions, and mortality. RESULTS: 86 of 670 patients (13%) who had undergone a lung resection developed a PPC. Those patients had a significantly longer hospital LOS in days (13, 95% CI 10.5-14.9 vs 6.3, 95% CI 5.9 to 6.7; p<0.001) and higher rates of ITU admissions (28% vs 1.9%; p<0.001) and 30-day hospital readmissions (20.7% vs 11.9%; p<0.05). Significant independent risk factors for development of PPCs were COPD and smoking (p<0.05), not age. Excluding early postoperative deaths, developing a PPC resulted in a significantly reduced overall survival in months (40, 95% CI 34 to 44 vs 46, 95% CI 44 to 47; p=0.006). Those who developed a PPC had a higher rate of non-cancer-related deaths (11% vs 5%; p=0.020). PPC is a significant independent risk factor for late deaths in non-small cell lung cancer patients (HR 2.0, 95% CI 1.9 to 3.2; p=0.006). CONCLUSIONS: Developing a PPC after thoracic surgery is common and is associated with a poorer long-term outcome.

Potentially modifiable factors contribute to limitation in physical activity following thoracotomy and lung resection: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Early mobility is considered important in minimising pulmonary complication, length of stay (LOS) and enhancing recovery following major surgery. We aimed to observe and measure the reduction in early postoperative physical activity following major thoracic surgery, identifying any potentially limiting factors, and factors predictive of reduced activity. METHODS: Patients undergoing thoracotomy and lung resection were prospectively observed for the purposes of this study. All patients were routinely assisted to mobilise by physiotherapists from postoperative day 1, and continued daily with exercise and progression of mobility as per usual practice. Physical activity was measured with SenseWear Pro 3 armband physiologic motion sensors between postoperative day 1-4. The motion sensors recorded step count, time spent in 'sedentary'/ 'moderate' activity, and energy expenditure. Frequency of postoperative pulmonary complication (PPC) and postoperative LOS were also observed. Multivariate analyses were performed using forward stepwise logistic regression; results are displayed as odds ratio (95% confidence intervals). RESULTS: n = 99, median (interquartile range) steps 472 (908) over combined postoperative days 2/ 3, sedentary activity (< 3 METs) 99%. Less active subjects reported significantly more pain on day 2 and 3 (p = 0.013/ 0.00 respectively) (p < 0.001). On regression analysis age ≥ 75 years, predicted FEV1 < 70% and poor preoperative activity were predictive of lower postoperative activity. Factors limiting mobility on day 1 included pain and dizziness. Median LOS was longer (p = 0.013) (6 vs. 5 days) in less active patients and frequency of PPC was 20% vs 4% (p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: Physical activity following major thoracic surgery is generally very limited, with less active patients demonstrating longer LOS. Factors limiting immediate postoperative mobility were largely modifiable, some of the factors predictive of lower activity were also possibly modifiable/amenable to physiotherapy or pulmonary rehabilitation. Prompt assessment and recognition of these factors is needed in future, with timely and effective management incorporated into care pathways to maximise each patients potential to mobilise postoperatively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN52709424.

Pulmonary rehabilitation programme for patients undergoing curative lung cancer surgery.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to develop a multistranded pragmatic rehabilitation programme for operable lung cancer patients, that looks into feasibility, process indicators, outcome measures, local adaptability, compliance and potential cost benefit. METHODS: An outpatient-based complex intervention, rehabilitation for operated lung cancer (ROC) programme, was developed to optimize physical status, prepare for the inpatient journey and support through recovery after surgery. It includes exercise classes, smoking cessation, dietary advice and patient education and was tested in an enriched cohort study within a regional thoracic unit over 18 months. RESULTS: A multistranded pragmatic rehabilitation programme pre- and post-surgery is feasible. Fifty-eight patients received the intervention and 305 received standard care. Both groups were matched for age, lung function comorbidity and type of surgery. Patients in the intervention group attended exercise classes twice a week until surgery, which was not delayed. Patients attended four sessions presurgery (range 1-15), resulting in an improvement of 20 m (range -73-195, P = 0.001) in a 6-min walk test and 0.66 l in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (range -1.85 from 1.11, P = 0.009) from baseline to presurgery. Fifty-four percentage of smokers in the intervention group stopped smoking. Sixteen percentage of patients were identified as being at risk of malnourishment and received nutritional intervention. There was a trend in patients in the intervention group towards experiencing fewer postoperative pulmonary complications than those in the non-intervention group (9 vs 16%, respectively, P = 0.21) and fewer readmissions to hospital because of complications (5 vs 14% respectively, P = 0.12). CONCLUSION: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-type pulmonary rehabilitation before and after lung cancer surgery is viable, and preliminary results suggest improvement in physical measures. A multicentre, randomized controlled trial is warranted to confirm clinical efficacy. ISRCTN REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN00061628.

Effectiveness of incentive spirometry in patients following thoracotomy and lung resection including those at high risk for developing pulmonary complications.

BACKGROUND: Following thoracotomy, patients frequently receive routine respiratory physiotherapy which may include incentive spirometry, a breathing technique characterised by deep breathing performed through a device offering visual feedback. This type of physiotherapy is recommended and considered important in the care of thoracic surgery patients, but high quality evidence for specific interventions such as incentive spirometry remains lacking. METHODS: 180 patients undergoing thoracotomy and lung resection participated in a prospective single-blind randomised controlled trial. All patients received postoperative breathing exercises, airway clearance and early mobilisation; the control group performed thoracic expansion exercises and the intervention group performed incentive spirometry. RESULTS: No difference was observed between the intervention and control groups in the mean drop in forced expiratory volume in 1 s on postoperative day 4 (40% vs 41%, 95% CI -5.3% to 4.2%, p=0.817), the frequency of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPC) (12.5% vs 15%, 95% CI -7.9% to 12.9%, p=0.803) or in any other secondary outcome measure. A high-risk subgroup (defined by ≥2 independent risk factors; age ≥75 years, American Society of Anaesthesiologists score ≥3, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), smoking status, body mass index ≥30) also demonstrated no difference in outcomes, although a larger difference in the frequency of PPC was observed (14% vs 23%) with 95% CIs indicating possible benefit of intervention (-7.4% to 2.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Incentive spirometry did not improve overall recovery of lung function, frequency of PPC or length of stay. For patients at higher risk for the development of PPC, in particular those with COPD or current/recent ex-smokers, there were larger observed actual differences in the frequency of PPC in favour of the intervention, indicating that investigations regarding the physiotherapy management of these patients need to be developed further.

Thoracoscore fails to predict complications following elective lung resection.

The Thoracoscore mortality risk model has been incorporated into the British Thoracic Society guidelines on the radical management of patients with lung cancer. The discriminative and predictive ability to predict mortality and post-operative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in this group of patients is uncertain. A prospective observational study was carried out on all patients following lung resection via thoracotomy in a regional thoracic centre over 42 months. 128 out of 703 subjects developed a PPC. 16 (2%) patients died in hospital. In a logistic regression analysis the Thoracoscore was not a significant predictor of mortality (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.99-1.17; p=0.11) but was a significant predictor of PPCs (OR 1.08, 95% CI 1.03-1.13; p=0.002). However, the area under the receiver operator characteristic curve for the Thoracoscore was 0.68 (95% CI 0.56-0.80) for predicting mortality and 0.64 (95% CI 0.59-0.69) for PPCs, indicating limited discriminative ability. In a logistic regression analysis, another risk model, the European Society Objective Score, was predictive of mortality (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.11-1.83; p=0.006) and PPCs (OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.30-1.68; p<0.0001). Therefore, Thoracoscore may have poor discriminative and predictive ability for mortality and PPCs following elective lung resection.

Is preoperative physiotherapy/pulmonary rehabilitation beneficial in lung resection patients?

A best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether preoperative physiotherapy/pulmonary rehabilitation is beneficial for patients undergoing lung resection. Ten papers were identified using the reported search, of which five represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. In 2007 a report showed in 13 subjects receiving a preoperative rehabilitation programme (PRP) an improvement of maximum oxygen uptake consumption (VO(2) max) of an average 2.4 ml/kg/min (95% confidence interval 1-3.8; P=0.002). A report in 2008 showed in 12 patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and VO(2) max <15 ml/kg/min that PRP could effect a mean improvement in VO(2) max of 2.8 ml/kg/min (P<0.001). An earlier report in 2005 demonstrated a reduced length of hospital stay (21±7 days vs. 29±9 days; P=0.0003) in 22 subjects who underwent PRP for two weeks compared with a historical control of 60 patients with COPD. It was shown in 2006 that by using a cross-sectional design with historical controls that one day of chest physiotherapy comprising inspiratory and peripheral muscle training compared with routine nursing care was associated with a lower atelectasis rate (2% vs. 7.7%) and a median length of stay that was 5.73 days vs. 8.33 days (P<0.0001). A prospective randomised controlled study in 1997, showed that two weeks of PRP followed by two months of postoperative rehabilitation produced a better predicted postoperative forced expiratory volume in one second in the study group than in the control group at three months (lobectomy + 570 ml vs. -70 ml; pneumonectomy + 680 ml vs. -110 ml). We conclude that preoperative physiotherapy improves exercise capacity and preserves pulmonary function following surgery. Whether these benefits translate into a reduction in postoperative pulmonary complication is uncertain.

Is prophylactic minitracheostomy beneficial in high-risk patients undergoing thoracotomy and lung resection?

A best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether prophylactic minitracheostomy (PM) is beneficial in high-risk patients undergoing thoracotomy and lung resection. Altogether, 115 papers were found using the reported search, of which four represented the best evidence to answer the question. Three randomised controlled trials (RCT) compared a total of 161 patients who underwent thoracotomy and received either PM or standard postoperative treatment alone. Another non-RCT of 144 patients observed the reduction of toilet bronchoscopy with the increased use of PM. These are summarised in the Table. The studies assessed the benefit of PM inserted immediately after lung resection surgery in patients perceived as at high-risk of developing pulmonary complications. High-risk defined patients as those who smoked, have poor lung function, ischaemic heart disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, absence/failure of regional analgesia, and/or cerebrovascular accident. In the largest randomised study (102 patients), Bonde et al. [Bonde P, Papachristos I, McCraith A, Kelly B, Wilson C, McGuigan JA, McManus K. Sputum retention after lung operation: prospective randomized trial shows superiority of prophylactic minitracheostomy in high-risk patients. Ann Thorac Surg 2002;74:196-202] concluded that the PM group had a significant reduction in sputum retention and postoperative atelectasis. The authors also reported a reduction in the incidence of pneumonia and toilet bronchoscopy but this did not achieve statistical significance. Issa et al. [Issa MM, Healy DM, Maghur HA, Luke DA. Prophylactic minitracheotomy in lung resection. A randomized controlled study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 1991;101:895-900] were able to demonstrate a significant reduction in the rate of pneumonia in the PM group and Randell et al. [Randell TT, Tierala E, Lepäntalo MJ, Lindgren L. Prophylactic minitracheostomy: a prospective, random control, clinical trial. Eur J Surg 1991;157:501-504] showed a significant reduction in postoperative atelectasis and toilet bronchoscopy in their PM group. Au et al. [Au J, Walker WS, Inglis D, Cameron EW. Percutaneous cricothyroidostomy (minitracheostomy) for bronchial toilet: results of therapeutic and prophylactic use. Ann Thorac Surg 1989;48:850-852] observed a reduction in toilet bronchoscopy from 9% to 4% in a four-year period; however, the authors could not directly relate this to the use of PM but believed it was likely. None of the studies demonstrated a statistical difference in mortality or intensive care unit or hospital length of 38 stay. All the studies reported some complications associated with minitracheostomy (MT) insertion, the incidence of which ranged from 5.6% to 57%. One percent of 227 patients who received MT in the studies experienced a life-threatening complication, the rest were minor and easily controlled. None of the complications resulted in death.

Chest physiotherapy in lung resection patients: state of the art.

The role of chest physiotherapy in limiting postoperative pulmonary complications and in the recovery of pulmonary function and exercise capacity after lung surgery is still unclear because of the lack of conclusive, well-designed clinical trials. In this article the available literature on these topics is reviewed, and the effects of respiratory physiotherapy, instituted preoperatively or administered after surgery to patients undergoing lung resection, are commented on. The authors conclude that chest physiotherapy improves preoperative exercise capacity; this is a parameter highly predictive of postoperative pulmonary complications. Also physiotherapy administered during the immediate period after lung resection probably decreases frequency of pulmonary complications. Finally, further investigation is required for a better understanding of the effects of long-term chest physiotherapy after hospital discharge in lung resection patients.

Incentive spirometry following thoracic surgery: what should we be doing?

BACKGROUND: Thoracic surgery may cause reduced respiratory function and pulmonary complications, with associated increased risk of mortality. Postoperative physiotherapy aims to reverse atelectasis and secretion retention, and may include incentive spirometry. OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence for incentive spirometry, examining the physiological basis, equipment and its use following thoracic surgery. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE was searched from 1950 to January 2008, EMBASE was searched from 1980 to January 2008, and CINAHL was searched from 1982 to January 2008, all using the OVID interface. The search term was: '[incentive spirometry.mp]'. The Cochrane Library was searched using the terms 'incentive spirometry' and 'postoperative physiotherapy'. The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy Resource Centre was also searched, and a hand search was performed to follow-up references from the retrieved studies. REVIEW METHOD: Non-scientific papers were excluded, as were papers that did not relate to thoracic surgery or the postoperative treatment of patients with incentive spirometry. RESULTS: Initially, 106 studies were found in MEDLINE, 99 in EMBASE and 42 in CINAHL. Eight references were found in the Cochrane Library and one paper in the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy Resource Centre. Four studies and one systematic review investigating the effects of postoperative physiotherapy and incentive spirometry in thoracic surgery patients were selected and reviewed. CONCLUSION: Physiological evidence suggests that incentive spirometry may be appropriate for lung re-expansion following major thoracic surgery. Based on sparse literature, postoperative physiotherapy regimes with, or without, the use of incentive spirometry appear to be effective following thoracic surgery compared with no physiotherapy input.

Is incentive spirometry effective following thoracic surgery?

A best evidence topic in thoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was whether incentive spirometry is a useful intervention for patients after thoracic surgery. Altogether 255 papers were found using the reported search, of which seven represented the best evidence to answer the clinical question. The authors, journal, date and country of publication, patient group studied, study type, relevant outcomes and results of these papers are tabulated. We conclude that incentive spirometry is a relatively good measure of lung function and may be used to assess respiratory recovery in the days after thoracic surgery. Physiotherapy either with or without incentive spirometry reduces the incidence of postoperative complications and improves lung function but there is currently no evidence that incentive spirometry in itself could either replace or significantly augment the work of the physiotherapists. Clinicians should be aware that while incentive spirometry can provide an assessment of lung recovery, well-organised and regular physiotherapy remains the most effective mechanism to augment their patient's recovery and avoid postoperative complications.