Shared decision-making should be a standard part of surgical care

Patient engagement to counter catheter-associated urinary tract infections with an app (PECCA): a multicentre, prospective, interrupted time-series and before-and-after study

BACKGROUND

The risk of urinary tract infections (UTIs) is increased by unnecessary placement and prolonged use of urinary catheters.

AIM

To assess whether inappropriate use of catheters and catheter-associated UTI were reduced through patient participation.

METHODS

In this multicentre, interrupted time-series and before-and-after study, we implemented a patient-centred app which provides catheter advice for patients, together with clinical lessons, feedback via e-mails and support rounds for staff members. Data on catheter use and infections were collected during a six-month baseline and a six-month intervention period on 13 wards in four hospitals in the Netherlands. Dutch Trial Register: NL7178.

FINDINGS

Between June 25th, 2018 and August 1st, 2019, 6556 patients were included in 24 point-prevalence surveys, 3285 (50%) at baseline and 3271 (50%) during the intervention. During the intervention 249 app users and a median of seven new app users per week were registered (interquartile range: 5.5-13.0). At baseline, inappropriate catheter use was registered for 175 (21.9%) out of 798 catheters, compared to 55 (7.0%) out of 786 during the intervention. Time-series analysis showed a non-significant decrease of inappropriate use of 5.8% (95% confidence interval: -3.76 to 15.45; P = 0.219), with an odds ratio of 0.27 (0.19-0.37; P < 0.001). Catheter-associated UTI decreased by 3.0% (1.3-4.6; P = 0.001), with odds ratio 0.541 (0.408-0.716; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Although UTI significantly decreased after the implementation, patient participation did not significantly reduce the prevalence of inappropriate urinary catheter use. However, the inappropriate catheter reduction of 5.8% and an odds ratio of 0.27 suggest a positive trend. Patient participation appears to reduce CAUTI and could reduce other healthcare-associated infections.

Evidence-Based Surgery: What Can Intra-Operative Images Contribute?

Evidence-based medicine integrates results from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and meta-analyses, combining the best external evidence with individual clinical expertise and patients' preferences. However, RCTs of surgery differ from those of medicine in that surgical performance is often assumed to be consistent. Yet, evaluating whether each surgery is performed to the same standard is quite challenging. As a primary issue, the novelty of this review is to emphasize-with a focus on orthopedic trauma-the advantage of having complete intra-operative image documentation, allowing the direct evaluation of the quality of the intra-operative technical performance. The absence of complete intra-operative image documentation leads to the inhomogeneity of case series, yielding inconsistent results due to the impossibility of a secondary analysis. Thus, comparisons and the reproduction of studies are difficult. Access to complete intra-operative image data in surgical RCTs allows not only secondary analysis but also comparisons with similar cases. Such complete data can be included in electronic papers. Offering these data to peers-in an accessible link-when presenting papers facilitates the selection process and improves publications for readers. Additionally, having access to the full set of image data for all presented cases serves as a rich resource for learning. It enables the reader to sift through the information and pinpoint the details that are most relevant to their individual needs, allowing them to potentially incorporate this knowledge into daily practice. A broad use of the concept of complete intra-operative image documentation is pivotal for bridging the gap between clinical research findings and real-world applications. Enhancing the quality of surgical RCTs would facilitate the equalization of evidence acquisition in both internal medicine and surgery. Joint effort by surgeons, scientific societies, publishers, and healthcare authorities is needed to support the ideas, implement economic requirements, and overcome the mental obstacles to its realization.

Frailty and Colorectal Surgery: Review and Concept of Cancer Frailty

Frailty is characterized by reduced physiological reserves across multiple systems. In patients with frailty, oncological surgery has been associated with a high rate of postoperative complications and worse overall survival. Further, given that cancer and frailty can co-exist in the same patient, cancer and cancer-related symptoms can rapidly accelerate the progression of baseline frailty, which we have termed "cancer frailty". This distinction is clinically meaningful because the prioritization of interventions and the treatment outcomes may differ based on health conditions. Specifically, in patients with cancer frailty, improvements in frailty may be achieved via surgical removal of tumors, while prehabilitation may be less effective, which may in turn result in delayed treatment and cancer progression. In this review, we focused on challenges in the surgical treatment of non-metastatic colorectal cancers in patients with frailty, including those related to decision making, prehabilitation, and surgery. Potential recommendations for treating patients with cancer frailty are also discussed.

Shared decision-making in patients with multiple sclerosis

Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic and progressive neurological disorder impacting physical, cognitive, and psychosocial health. The disease course, severity, and presence of symptoms differ within and between persons over time and are unpredictable. Given the preference-sensitive nature of many key decisions to be made, and the increasing numbers of disease-modifying therapies, shared decision-making (SDM) with patients seems to be key in offering optimum care and outcomes for people suffering from MS. In this paper, we describe our perspective on how to achieve SDM in patients with MS, following key SDM-elements from established SDM-frameworks. As for deliberation in the clinical encounter, SDM communication training of professionals and feedback on their current performance are key aspects, as well as encouraging patients to participate. Concerning information for patients, it is important to provide balanced, evidence-based information about the benefits and the harms of different treatment options, including the option of surveillance only. At the same time, attention is needed for the optimal dosage of that information, given the symptoms of cognitive dysfunction and fatigue among MS-patients, and the uncertainties they have to cope with. Finally, for broader communication, a system is required that assures patient preferences are actually implemented by multidisciplinary MS-teams. As SDM is also being implemented in many countries within the context of value-based health care, we consider the systematic use of outcome information, such as patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and Patient Decision Aids, as an opportunity to achieve SDM.