Preoperative Optimization of Patients Undergoing Ambulatory Surgery

Ambulatory anesthesia: restructuring for success

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We review current evidence about organizational structures, patient selection criteria, safety measures, economic considerations, quality management, and staffing challenges in ambulatory anesthesia. The focus is on the facilitators and barriers related to the peri-interventional period and the potential concepts and innovations for the future development of ambulatory anesthesia services.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent findings shed light on organizational structures in ambulatory anesthesia, including hospital-based centers, freestanding ambulatory centers, and office-based practices. Patient selection for ambulatory anesthesia involves a two-step process, considering both surgical and anesthetic factors. Safety measures, such as standardized guidelines and scoring systems, aim to ensure patient well being during the perioperative course. Economic considerations pose challenges due to the complexities of managing operating room efficiency and the variations in reimbursement systems. Quality management in ambulatory anesthesia emphasizes the need for outcome studies and patient-centered quality indicators. Staffing requirements necessitate highly skilled professionals with both technical and nontechnical skills, and structured education and training are essential.

SUMMARY

Ambulatory anesthesia is gaining importance due to advancements in surgical techniques and peri-interventional care. The review highlights the need for addressing challenges related to organizational structures, patient selection, patient safety, economic considerations, quality management, and staffing in ambulatory anesthesia. Understanding and addressing these factors are crucial for promoting the further development and improvement of ambulatory anesthesia services.

Barriers to Surgical Intervention and Factors Influencing Motor Outcomes in Patients with Severe Peripheral Nerve Injury: A Province Wide Cohort Study

INTRODUCTION

Despite the importance of timing of nerve surgery after peripheral nerve injury, optimal timing of intervention has not been clearly delineated. The goal of this study is to explore factors that may have a significant impact on clinical outcomes of severe peripheral nerve injury that requires reconstruction with nerve transfer or graft.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Adult patients who underwent peripheral nerve transfer or grafting in Alberta were reviewed. Clustered multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association of time to surgery, type of nerve repair, and patient characteristics on strength outcomes. Cox proportional hazard regression analysis model was used to examine factors correlated with increased time to surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 163 patients identified, the median time to surgery was 212 days. For every week of delay, the adjusted odds of achieving Medical Research Council strength grade ≥ 3 decreases by 3%. An increase in preinjury comorbidities was associated with longer overall time to surgery (aHR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74-0.95). Referrals made by surgeons were associated with a shorter time to surgery compared to general practitioners (aHR 1.87, 95% CI 1.14-3.06). In patients treated with nerve transfer, the adjusted odds of achieving antigravity strength was 388% compared to nerve grafting; while the adjusted odds decreased by 65% if the injury sustained had a pre-ganglionic injury component.

CONCLUSION

Mitigating delays in surgical intervention is crucial to optimizing outcomes. The nature of initial nerve injury and surgical reconstructive techniques are additional important factors that impact postoperative outcomes.

Neuromuscular Blockade and Reversal Practice Variability in the Outpatient Setting: Insights From US Utilization Patterns

BACKGROUND

Neuromuscular blockade (NMB) is a critical part of many surgical procedures. Data on practice patterns of NMB agents (NMBAs) and NMB reversal in recent years in the US ambulatory surgical care setting are limited.

METHODS

This retrospective analysis of US adult outpatients was conducted using the Premier Healthcare Database. We describe anesthesia practice trends in NMB management and assess the association of patient, procedural, and site characteristics with NMB reversal approach using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Approximately 5.2 million outpatient surgical encounters involving NMB and 4.6 million involving rocuronium or vecuronium between January 2014 and June 2019 were included. Following the introduction of sugammadex to US clinical practice (~2016), there was an increased use of rocuronium or vecuronium and a decrease in succinylcholine alone. Before 2016, NMB was pharmacologically reversed with neostigmine in approximately two-thirds of outpatient encounters. Over time, active reversal increased; by 2019, 42.3% and 36.0% of encounters were reversed by neostigmine and sugammadex, respectively, with 21.7% undergoing spontaneous recovery. Choice of NMBA (rocuronium or vecuronium alone), time since 2016, obesity, peripheral vascular disease, and procedures on the digestive, ocular, and female genital systems (vs musculoskeletal procedures) were independently and positively associated with pharmacologic reversal (versus spontaneous reversal). Conversely, advanced age; Western geography; and cardiovascular, endocrine, hemic/lymphatic, respiratory, and ear, nose, and throat procedures were independently and negatively associated with pharmacologic reversal of NMB.Among pharmacologic reversals, time since 2016 was positively and independently associated with sugammadex compared with neostigmine (odds ratios [ORs], ranged from 1.8 in 2017 to 3.2, P < .0001 in 2019). Those administered rocuronium or vecuronium without succinylcholine, with increased age and history of certain comorbidities, and those undergoing ocular or respiratory procedures (compared with musculoskeletal) were positively associated with reversal with sugammadex and endocrine procedure negatively and independently associated with reversal with sugammadex. There was variability in the association of several factors with NMB reversal choices by geographic region, particularly in patients' race, ethnicity, and size of affiliated hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, active pharmacological reversal of NMB increased in US adult outpatients following the introduction of sugammadex, although there remains significant practice variability. The multifactorial relationship between patient-, procedural-, and environmental-level characteristics and NMB management is rapidly evolving. Additional research on how these anesthesia practice patterns may be impacted by the shift to the ambulatory care setting and how they may impact patient outcomes and health disparities is warranted.

Association Between Preoperative Benzodiazepine Use and Postoperative Opioid Use and Health Care Costs

IMPORTANCE

The association between preoperative benzodiazepine use and long-term postoperative outcomes is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the association between preoperative benzodiazepine use and postoperative opioid use and health care costs.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this cohort study, retrospective analysis of private health insurance claims data on 946 561 opioid-naive patients (no opioid prescriptions filled in the year before surgery) throughout the US was conducted. Patients underwent 1 of 11 common surgical procedures between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2016; data analysis was performed January 9, 2020.

EXPOSURES

Benzodiazepine use, defined as long term (≥10 prescriptions filled or ≥120 days supplied in the year before surgery) or intermittent (any use not meeting the criteria for long term).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was opioid use 91 to 365 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes included opioid use 0 to 90 days after surgery and health care costs 0 to 30 days after surgery.

RESULTS

In this sample of 946 561 patients, the mean age was 59.8 years (range, 18-89 years); 615 065 were women (65.0%). Of these, 23 484 patients (2.5%) met the criteria for long-term preoperative benzodiazepine use and 47 669 patients (5.0%) met the criteria for intermittent use. After adjusting for confounders, long-term (odds ratio [OR], 1.59; 95% CI, 1.54-1.65; P < .001) and intermittent (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.44-1.51; P < .001) benzodiazepine use were associated with an increased probability of any opioid use during postoperative days 91 to 365. For patients who used opioids in postoperative days 91 to 365, long-term benzodiazepine use was associated with a 44% increase in opioid dose (additional 0.6 mean daily morphine milligram equivalents [MMEs]; 95% CI, 0.3-0.8 MMEs; P < .001), although intermittent benzodiazepine use was not significantly different (0.0 average daily MMEs; 95% CI, -0.2 to 0.2 MMEs; P = .65). Preoperative benzodiazepine use was also associated with increased opioid use in postoperative days 0 to 90 for both long-term (32% increase, additional 1.9 average daily MMEs; 95% CI, 1.6-2.1 MMEs; P < .001) and intermittent (9% increase, additional 0.5 average daily MMEs; 95% CI, 0.4-0.6 MMEs; P < .001) users. Intermittent benzodiazepine use was associated with an increase in 30-day health care costs ($1155; 95% CI, $938-$1372; P < .001), while no significant difference was observed for long-term benzodiazepine use.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this study suggest that, among opioid-naive patients, preoperative benzodiazepine use may be associated with an increased risk of developing long-term opioid use and increased opioid dosages postoperatively, and also may be associated with increased health care costs.