Search

The perioperative period extends from the moment of contemplation of surgery through to recovery at home. Patients on a surgical pathway will experience multiple transition points in their care. As we move to more collaborative working and caring for increasingly medically complex patients, we must establish robust processes to mitigate against the potential for patient harm posed by these multiple transition points. This article reviews best practice and guidance on handover of care throughout the perioperative period. We will look at models of transition of care beyond the hospital environment and how better use of community resources can smooth the transition of care out of hospital for ongoing rehabilitation.

Background Major surgery accounts for a substantial proportion of health service activity and resource consumption, due not only to the primary procedure, but also the short and long-term implications of perioperative complications. It is likely that both compliance with best practice processes and outcomes from major surgery vary substantially between hospitals and therefore could be targets for quality improvement. Methods The Perioperative Quality Improvement Programme (PQIP) patient study is a multi-centre prospective cohort study which recruits participants undergoing major inpatient non-cardiac surgery with three main aims: to measure and improve processes of care and outcome from major surgery; to implement and evaluate a complex intervention aiming to enhance the use of data for improvement by clinical teams; and to create a national database to support collaborative research and efficient study design. The prospective dataset combines variables for risk adjustment, process measures and both objective and patient reported outcome data. Longer-term outcomes are collected through linkage to national administrative datasets (mortality and readmissions). PQIP deploys a theoretically underpinned improvement methodology to support the use of data for improvement by perioperative clinicians, incorporating action research principles to enable changes to be made in response to user feedback. Dissemination of interim findings (non-inferential) form a part of the improvement methodology and are 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 multi-modal communications strategy to patients, public, policy makers and academic audiences as well as clinicians. Discussion PQIP is the first national effort in the UK to measure and report risk-adjusted complications, patient-reported outcome and mortality rates for patients undergoing major surgery across multiple surgical specialties in the UK. Its main limitation is the risk of sampling bias due to the requirement for patient consent, and because local resource constraints may lead hospitals to recruit a convenience sample, rather than a truly random sample. We will evaluate this risk by using Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) to identify all patients undergoing PQIP eligible procedures, and undertaking sensitivity analyses comparing common data points in the PQIP sample and the HES population. As the purpose of PQIP is to support quality improvement and research as opposed to quality assurance or institutional comparisons, even if they exist, such sampling biases are unlikely to materially affect the ability of the programme to achieve its aims.

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.

Background This paper describes a rapid response project from the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics & Human Factors (CIEHF) to support the design, development, usability testing and operation of new ventilators as part of the UK response during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method A five-step approach was taken to (1) assess the COVID-19 situation and decide to formulate a response; (2) mobilise and coordinate Human Factors/Ergonomics (HFE) specialists; (3) ideate, with HFE specialists collaborating to identify, analyse the issues and opportunities, and develop strategies, plans and processes; (4) generate outputs and solutions; and (5) respond to the COVID-19 situation via targeted support and guidance. Results The response for the rapidly manufactured ventilator systems (RMVS) has been used to influence both strategy and practice to address concerns about changing safety standards and the detailed design procedure with RMVS manufacturers. Conclusion The documents are part of a wider collection of HFE advice which is available on the CIEHF COVID-19 website (https://covid19.ergonomics.org.uk/).

Having an operation is a major event in a patient’s life. Many will have had limited previous exposure to hospitals. There is much patients can do to improve their physical and mental health prior to surgery that can have a significant impact on their recovery and long-term health. Understanding the steps they can take can empower patients to make lasting changes. Fitter, Better, Sooner is a toolkit aimed at helping patients to prepare physically and psychologically for surgery (Figure 1). It was produced by the Royal College of Anaesthetists (RCoA), with representatives from the Royal College of General Practitioners (RCGP) and the Royal College of Surgeons (RCS), and with patient representatives playing key roles on the working group, reflecting the importance of multidisciplinary input for optimal perioperative care. The resources have been endorsed by both the RCGP and RCS, and have been awarded ‘highly commended’ in the BMA Patient Information Awards 2019. Figure 1. Fitter, Better, Sooner patient information resources. https://www.rcoa.ac.uk/patient-information/ preparing-surgery-fitter-better-sooner. © Royal College of Anaesthetists. The toolkit is intended for patients who are awaiting, or considering, surgery. It introduces the many ways in which they can optimise their health, lifestyle, and activity levels to maximise their chances of a good recovery, free of complications. It …

In 2016, NHS England set up 10 integrated care systems (ICSs) which aim to devolve some responsibility for delivery of health and social care services to local healthcare providers in partnership with local government, social care, primary care networks, and voluntary and charitable organisations. These are new ways of working and provide an opportunity to better integrate perioperative care across the entire pathway from the moment of contemplation of surgery through to recovery at home. This review describes the ways in which the aims of many ICS plans can be met with good perioperative care, and how clinicians can use this opportunity to make significant progress in improving outcomes for patients. We describe examples of initiatives in cancer pathways which are already proving successful and have caught the imagination of the local community at all levels, as well as examples of integrated perioperative care across the country which can be applied to other systems. We hope to demonstrate ways in which perioperative care can add value to a local health population given the right support and chance to deliver it.