Search

Objective: Decision making about high-risk surgery can be complex, particularly when outcomes may be uncertain. Clinicians have a legal and ethical responsibility to support decision making which fits with patients' values and preferences. In the UK, preoperative assessment and optimisation is led by Anaesthetists in clinic several weeks prior to planned surgery. Training in supporting shared decision making (SDM) has been identified as an area of need among UK anaesthetists with leadership roles in perioperative care. Methods: We describe adaptation of a generic SDM workshop to perioperative care, in particular to decisions on high-risk surgery, and its delivery to UK healthcare professionals over a two-year period. Feedback from workshops were thematically analysed. We explored further improvements to the workshop and ideas for development and dissemination. Results: The workshops were well received, with high satisfaction for techniques used, including video demonstrations, role-play and discussions. Thematic analysis identified a desire for multidisciplinary training and training in using patient aids. Conclusion: Qualitative findings suggest workshops were considered useful with perceived improvement in SDM awareness, skills and reflective practice. Innovation: This pilot introduces a new modality of training in the perioperative setting providing physicians, particularly Anaesthetists, with previously unavailable training needed to facilitate complex discussions.

Abstract Introduction Major surgery accounts for a substantial proportion of health service activity, due not only to the primary procedure, but the longer-term health implications of poor short-term outcome. Data from small studies or from outside the UK indicate that rates of complications and failure to rescue vary between hospitals, as does compliance with best practice processes. Within the UK, there is currently no system for monitoring postoperative complications (other than short-term mortality) in major non-cardiac surgery. Further, there is variation between national audit programmes, in the emphasis placed on quality assurance versus quality improvement, and therefore the principles of measurement and reporting which are used to design such programmes. Methods and analysis The PQIP patient study is a multi-centre prospective cohort study which recruits patients undergoing major surgery. Patient provide informed consent and contribute baseline and outcome data from their perspective using a suite of patient-reported outcome tools. Research and clinical staff complete data on patient risk factors and outcomes in-hospital, including two measures of complications. Longer-term outcome data are collected through patient feedback and linkage to national administrative datasets (mortality and readmissions). As well as providing a uniquely granular dataset for research, PQIP provides feedback to participating sites on their compliance with evidence-based processes and their patients’ outcomes, with the aim of supporting local quality improvement. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by the Health Research Authority in the UK. Dissemination of interim findings (non-inferential) will form a part of the improvement methodology and will be provided to participating centres at regular intervals, including near-real time feedback of key process measures. Inferential analyses will be published in the peer-reviewed literature, supported by a comprehensive multi-modal communications strategy including to patients, policy makers and academic audiences as well as clinicians.