Implementing shared decision making according to the choosing wisely programme: Perioperative medicine for older people undergoing surgery.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) is the process whereby patients and healthcare professionals work together to achieve a consensus management decision, based on best clinical evidence and patient's preferences. No formal approach to documentation of SDM conversations exists in setting of peri-operative medicine. OBJECTIVE: To assess and improve the quality and consistency of documentation regarding SDM conversations in an elective surgical outpatient population and appraise the satisfaction of patients and professionals in SDM. METHODS: The study was conducted in a geriatrician led perioperative medicine for older people undergoing surgery service, at an inner-city teaching hospital serving a tertiary surgical referral population. The quality improvement programme intervention comprised a Choosing Wisely, UK SDM tool, consisting of Benefits, Risks, Alternatives and Doing Nothing (BRAN mnemonic), clinic posters, patient leaflets, and an introductory SDM workshop and education sessions, and observation and standardised feedback of SDM. Clinic letters were reviewed to identify SDM documentation compliance. Participants included clinicians of all grades and disciplines, and consecutive patients attending the clinic. RESULTS: Clinician interviews revealed inconsistent documentation of SDM. We reviewed 203 clinic letters following the initial implementation of SDM documentation tool, only 59% (n = 120) had fully completement BRAN tool. Additional interventions improved clinic SDM documentation compliance to 98%. A prospective observation study conducted revealed patients and clinician satisfaction at 93% and 79%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The BRAN tool is adaptable to many health decision settings, including discussions related to treatment, investigations, and procedures, which expands its potential to improve patient safety.

Frailty assessment in older urological patients prior to surgery: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Radical cystectomy (RC) and urinary diversion are the recommended treatment for patients with muscle invasive bladder cancer. This is complex surgery, associated with significant patient morbidity and mortality. Frailty has been shown to be an independent risk factor for adverse outcomes in several surgical populations. Preoperative assessment of frailty is advocated in current guidelines but is not yet standard clinical practice. AIMS: This systematic review and narrative synthesis aims to examine whether patients undergoing RC are assessed for frailty, what tools are used, and whether an association is found between frailty and adverse outcomes in this population. RESULTS: Nine studies, published within the last 4 years, describe the use of tools reporting to measure frailty in the RC population. All demonstrate increased risk of adverse postoperative outcomes with higher frailty levels. Only one study used a validated frailty tool. The majority of studies measure frailty using variations on a tool derived from a large database (ACS-NSQIP) effectively counting co-morbidities, rather than assessing the multidomain nature of the frailty syndrome. CONCLUSION: The recognition of frailty as an important consideration in the perioperative period is welcome. This systematic review and narrative synthesis demonstrates the need for collaboration in research and delivery of clinical care for older surgical patients. Such collaboration may provide clarity regarding terms such as frailty and multimorbidity, preventing the development of assessment tools inaccurately measuring these discreet syndromes interchangeably. More accurate assessment of patients in terms of frailty, multimorbidity and functional status may allow better modification and shared decision making leading to improved postoperative outcomes in older patients undergoing RC.