Search

Pre-operative optimisation is a heterogenous group of interventions aimed at improving peri-operative outcomes. To understand the evidence for pre-operative optimisation in the developing world, we systematically reviewed Cochrane reviews on the topic according to the Human Developmental Index (HDI) of the country where patient recruitment occurred. We used summary statistics and cartograms to describe the HDI, year of publication, timing of pre-operative intervention and risk of bias associated with each included trial. We assessed the impact of multinational trials on the risk of bias introduced by countries of differing HDI. Four-hundred and nine trials representing 51 countries and 89,389 randomly allocated participants were summarised in this review. Four-hundred and nineteen out of 451 (93%) trial populations (i.e. a group of study participants from one country) were from high and very high HDI countries. The median (IQR [range]) HDI of countries were 0.862 (0.806-0.892 [0.445-0.949]). Three of the 409 included trials were multinational, representing 32 countries and 37,736 out of 89,389 (42.2%) included participants. Africa was the least represented continent, with only 4 included trials and 566 participants, of which 62.3% were from one multinational trial. The overall risk of bias was high or unclear in 381 out of 409 (93%) trials. Inclusion of multinational trials decreased the proportion of trial populations introducing high or unclear risk of bias by 9.4% (95%CI 5.1-13.7; p < 0.0001). Half of the world's population live in low- and middle-HDI countries. This population is poorly represented in systematically reviewed evidence on pre-operative optimisation. Multinational trials increase the knowledge contribution from low- and middle-HDI countries and decrease risk of bias in systematic reviews., (© 2018 Association of Anaesthetists.)

By convention, autonomic function tests are undertaken under standard test conditions that limit their implementation during routine pre-operative assessment. We therefore evaluated the comparability of autonomic function tests under both non-standardised and standardised test conditions in 20 healthy male subjects. Autonomic function was assessed using an ECG monitor and a continuous non-invasive blood pressure measurement device. Under non-standardised conditions, intraclass correlation for heart rate variability analysis was good for the low and high frequency bands (0.87; 95% CI 0.58-0.96 and 0.83; 95% CI 0.56-0.94, respectively), but moderate (0.65; 95% CI 0.14-0.86) for the very low frequency band; reproducibility was high for the expiration/inspiration ratio (0.89; 95% CI 0.71-0.96), Valsalva ratio (0.76; 95% CI 0.37-0.91) and handgrip test (0.76; 95% CI 0.35-0.91) (all p<0.05) but was low for the response to quick standing. Reproducibility under standardised conditions was comparable to the above values. We demonstrated that reproducibility for most autonomic tests under non-standardised conditions is acceptable and suggest that implementation of these tests during pre-operative assessment may be feasible., (© 2010 The Authors. Anaesthesia © 2010 The Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland.)

The Scottish Audit of Surgical Mortality is a voluntary, peer reviewed, critical event analysis of patients who die under the care of consultant surgeons in acute hospitals in Scotland. The anaesthetic contribution to surgical mortality over a 10-year period from 1996 was reviewed. The total number of deaths was 44 230 or 1.5% of all admissions. Forty thousand, eight hundred and ninety-six deaths (92%) were audited. Deaths after elective surgery declined over 10 years. Over 80% of deaths followed emergency admission. The number of deaths where an anaesthetist was present was 16 981 or 0.6% of all admissions. Anaesthetic areas of concern were identified in 8% of deaths. Of these, 43% were related to pre-operative assessment. Anaesthesia also played a part in a further 18% of deaths where decision making was shared with the surgical team. Of these, 41% were related to access to critical care. A further 24% related to communication failures, principally when the operation should not have been done or was unnecessary.

National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death guidelines for urgent surgery recommend a fully staffed emergency operating theatre and restriction of 'after-midnight' operating to immediate life-, limb- or organ-threatening conditions. Audit performed in our institution demonstrated significant decreases in waiting times for urgent surgery and an increased seniority of medical care associated with overnight pre-operative assessment of patients by anaesthetic trainees. Nevertheless, urgent cases continued to be delayed unnecessarily. A classification of delays was developed from existing guidelines and their incidence was audited. The results were disseminated to involved directorates. A repeat of the audit demonstrated a significant decrease in delays (p = 0.001), a significant increase in the availability of surgeons (p = 0.001) and a significant decrease in the median waiting time for urgent surgery compared to the first audit cycle and a previous standard (p < 0.01). We conclude that auditing delays and disseminating the results of the audit significantly decreases delays and median waiting times for urgent surgery because of improved surgical availability.

Previous communication research in general medical practice has shown that effective communication enhances patient compliance, satisfaction and medical outcome. It is expected that communication is equally important in anaesthesia, since patients often suffer from anxiety and lack of knowledge about anaesthetic procedures. However, little is known about the nature of communication during routine anaesthetic visits. The present study of 57 authentic anaesthetic visits provides the first results on the structure and content of communication in the pre-operative setting using the Roter Interaction Analysis System (RIAS). Patient-centred communication behaviours of anaesthetists and the extent of patient involvement were particularly investigated. From the 57 pre-operative visits, 18 267 utterances were coded. The mean (SD) [range] duration of the visit was 16.1 (7.8) [3.7-42.7] min. Anaesthetists provided 169 (68) and patients 153 (82) utterances per visit (53.5% vs. 46.5%). Physician and patient gender had no impact on the distribution of utterances and the duration of the visit. Conversation mainly focussed on biomedical issues with little psychosocial discussion (< 0.1% of all anaesthetist utterances). However, anaesthetists quite frequently used emotional comments toward patients (7%) and involved them in the conversation. The use of facilitators, open questions and emotional statements by the anaesthetist correlated with high patient involvement. The amount of patient participation in anaesthetic decisions was assessed with the Observing Patient Involvement Scale (OPTION). Compared with general practitioners, anaesthetists offered more opportunities to discuss treatment options (mean (SD) OPTION score 26.8 (16.8) vs. 16.8 (7.7)).

We quantified the accuracy of trained nurses to correctly assess the pre-operative health status of surgical patients as compared to anaesthetists. The study included 4540 adult surgical patients. Patients' health status was first assessed by the nurse and subsequently by the anaesthetist. Both needed to answer the question: 'is this patient ready for surgery without additional work-up, Yes/No?' (primary outcome). The secondary outcome was the time required to complete the assessment. Anaesthetists and nurses were blinded for each other's results. The anaesthetists' result was the reference standard. In 87% of the patients, the classifications by nurses and anaesthetists were similar. The sensitivity of the nurses' assessment was 83% (95% CI: 79-87%) and the specificity 87% (95% CI: 86-88%). In 1.3% (95% CI: 1.0-1.6%) of patients, nurses classified patients as 'ready' whereas anaesthetists did not. Nurses required 1.85 (95% CI: 1.80-1.90) times longer than anaesthetists. By allowing nurses to serve as a diagnostic filter to identify the subgroup of patients who may safely undergo surgery without further diagnostic workup or optimisation, anaesthetists can focus on patients who require additional attention before surgery.

The Theory of Planned Behaviour has been used to investigate the likelihood that anaesthetists will routinely perform three violations of safety guidelines. The three violations were: failing to visit patients before surgery, failure to perform pre-anaesthetic equipment checks and the silencing of alarms during anaesthesia. These suggested violations arose from discussions with the Medical Defence Union. In forming the intention not to perform these violations, anaesthetists are most influenced by their normative beliefs about the violation, i.e. the opinion they believe a group of peers and other significant other people would hold about them performing the violation. The next most influential factor is their personal norms, i.e. beliefs that the individual has about whether the violation is really right or wrong, followed by behavioural beliefs, i.e. beliefs about the consequences of performing the violation, and control beliefs, i.e. beliefs about how much control they have over performing the violation. The results show that the more intense the anaesthetists' belief that the violations were important, the less likely they were to violate, except for the case of alarm silencing. This result suggests that there may be a basic lack of confidence in the reliability of audible alarms that undermines their utility.

Nurses assess patients pre-operatively using screening questionnaires and locally-developed protocols. Our objectives were to determine which questions might identify patients who should be seen by an anaesthetist before the day of surgery. A review of the literature and a preliminary questionnaire to establish questions to be tested was followed by a modified, two-round Delphi questionnaire to determine the level of agreement by anaesthetists. There was agreement for referring patients who gave a positive response to questions that query: restricted exercise tolerance; previous anaesthetic problems; family history of anaesthetic problem; pathology affecting neck movement; angina; arrhythmia; heart failure; asthma; epilepsy; insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus; liver disease and unspecified kidney disease. There was equivocal agreement on questions that report a myocardial infarction over one year ago, cerebrovascular accident, non insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus and thyroid disease. Nurses should use these criteria during pre-operative assessment to decide the timing of evaluation by an anaesthetist.

A questionnaire was devised from guidelines published by the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland for the conduct of the pre-operative interview and conduct of anaesthesia. The responses to the questionnaire formed the basis of an accumulative record of patient feedback on individual anaesthetist's performance and used as one component of annual appraisal. The median "desired answer" and "overall dissatisfaction" percentages, and the "desired : undesired answer" ratio for consultants and non-training grade doctors from 835 patients at a large Acute District General Hospital were 92%, 0.6% and 12:1, respectively.

Pre-operative optimisation of high-risk patients undergoing major elective surgery has been shown to decrease peri-operative morbidity and mortality. It is also cost effective because of the resulting decrease in postoperative complications. A questionnaire was sent to 170 intensive care and high dependency units in Britain in order to quantify the number of units practising pre-operative optimisation. There was a 91% response rate. Of the respondents familiar with the evidence advocating pre-operative optimisation, 91% believe pre-operative optimisation improves outcome but only 62% admit patients for such preparation. Moreover, only eight units (6%) admit more than 25% of eligible patients. The reasons given for not admitting such patients pre-operatively are a lack of manpower, beds or both. This survey demonstrates the need for greater investment of resources into intensive care and high dependency units, so that clinicians can deliver high-quality evidence-based healthcare in accordance with the principles of clinical governance.

Medical error is an important cause of morbidity and mortality. Organisational failure in the pre-operative period has been associated with catastrophic outcome. Little information is available regarding peri-operative organisational problems. The incidence and nature of organisational failure before urgent and emergency surgery in a district general hospital was studied prospectively in 159 cases over a 30-day period. Organisational failure affected more than half of the cases overall, but varied in both its incidence and its complexity between surgical disciplines. Various causative factors were identified, e.g. 8% of cases were subject to delay due to clinical emergencies. The median [range] time required to rectify the problems was 115 [5-750] min. A consultant anaesthetist and surgeon were present in 30 and 20% of cases, respectively. Difficulty with the preparation of patients for emergency surgery is an important but underevaluated cause of medical error that may put patients at risk.

The Australian Incident Monitoring Study database was examined for incidents involving inadequate pre-operative patient preparation and/or evaluation. Of 6271 reports, 727 had appropriate keywords, of which 197 (3.1%) were used for subsequent analysis. All surgical categories were represented. In 10% of reports the patient was not reviewed pre-operatively by an anaesthetist, whilst in 23% the anaesthetist involved in the operating theatre had not performed the pre-operative assessment. Death followed in seven cases, major morbidity in 23 cases, admission to a high-dependency unit or intensive care unit in 17 cases, and surgery was cancelled in nine cases. Poor airway assessment, communication problems and inadequate evaluation were the most common contributing factors. Respondents indicated that the incident was preventable in 57% of cases. Proposed corrective strategies include improved communication, quality assurance activities, development of protocols and additional training. A structured assessment of the airway, along with improvements in information exchange, patient assessment, and use of clearly defined patient management plans and pathways would prevent most of the incidents reported.

Gorham syndrome is a rare chronic disease of children and young adults, featuring massive osteolysis with pathological fractures and complicated by respiratory and neurological deficits. To date, 175 cases have been reported in the literature but information on anaesthetic management is sparse. We present a child with Gorham syndrome who underwent urgent surgical medullary decompression and who subsequently developed bilateral pleural effusions.

A prospective study of routine premedication management was carried out at a large teaching hospital. Many patients received their premedication at times inappropriate for it to be effective. Several patients receiving regular medication had this suddenly stopped pre-operatively. Prolonged fasting occurred in both elective and emergency groups of patients. Benzodiazepines and opioids were prescribed most frequently and drying agents were used widely. Antacids, H2-blockers and agents to promote gastric emptying were used very little despite the potential of aspiration in many groups of patients. This audit of activity has revealed several areas of practice that can either be improved immediately or warrant detailed investigation.