The impact of universal cardiopulmonary exercise testing on perioperative pathways and short-term patient outcomes following elective pancreatic surgery: A retrospective cohort study.

Background: The utility of Cardiopulmonary Exercise Testing (CPET) to identify higher risk surgical patients remains controversial. There is limited research investigating the value of preoperative CPET to plan perioperative pathways for patients undergoing major pancreatic surgery. Methods: Retrospective cohort study, comprising two groups before and after a change in referral policy for High Risk preoperative anaesthetic clinic with CPET. Period 1 discretionary referral and Period 2: universal referral. The primary aim was to investigate the impact of this policy change on critical care use (planned vs unplanned) on the day of surgery and on delayed critical care admission. Secondary end points included a comparison of the total number of critical care bed days, days in hospital, complication rates and mortality data between the two cohorts. Results: 177 patients were included; 114 in Period 1 and 63 in Period 2. There was a reduction in unplanned day of surgery postoperative admissions to critical care (28.1% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.008). Seven (6.1%) of patients in Period 1 and 1 (1.6%) patient in Period 2 had delayed admission, though no p value was calculated due to the small numbers involved. Complication rates were similar in each group. The median critical care bed days was 1 (range 0-21) days in Period 1 and 1 (0-13) days in Period 2. Conclusions: A universal referral policy for preoperative CPET demonstrated a decrease in unplanned day of surgery critical care admissions and a trend towards reducing delayed (>24 h postop) critical care admission which could be investigated in a larger study. No measurable impact was seen on clinical outcomes.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on anaesthesia trainees and their training.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19; severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2] has dislocated clinical services and postgraduate training. To better understand and to document these impacts, we contacted anaesthesia trainees and trainers across six continents and collated their experiences during the pandemic. All aspects of training programmes have been affected. Trainees report that reduced caseload, sub-specialty experience, and supervised procedures are impairing learning. Cancelled educational activities, postponed examinations, and altered rotations threaten progression through training. Job prospects and international opportunities are downgraded. Work-related anxieties about provision of personal protective equipment, and risks to self and to colleagues are superimposed on concerns for family and friends and domestic disruption. These seismic changes have had consequences for well-being and mental health. In response, anaesthetists have developed innovations in teaching and trainee support. New technologies support trainer-trainee interactions, with a focus on e-learning. National training bodies and medical regulators that specify training and oversee assessment of trainees and their progression have provided flexibility in their requirements. Within anaesthesia departments, support transcends grades and job titles with lessons for the future. Attention to wellness, awareness of mental health issues and multimodal support can attenuate but not eliminate trainee distress.