Decision Aids: The Role of the Patient in Perioperative Safety

Spinal anesthesia in elective lumbar spinal surgery

Spinal anesthesia (SA) is gaining recognition as a safe and efficacious regional alternative to general anesthesia for elective lumbar surgery. However, unfamiliarity with management issues related to its use has limited the adoption of awake spine surgery, despite its benefits. Few centers in the United States routinely offer SA for elective lumbar surgery, and a comprehensive workflow to standardize SA for lumbar surgery is lacking. In this article, we examine recent literature on the use of SA in lumbar surgery, review the experience of our institution with SA in lumbar surgery, and provide a cohesive outline to streamline the implementation of SA from the perspective of the anesthesiologist. We review the critical features of SA in contemporary lumbar surgery, including selection of patients, methods of SA, intraoperative sedation, and management of several important technical considerations. We aimed to flatten the learning curve to improve the availability and accessibility of the technique for eligible patients.

Implementation of advance care planning decision aids for patients undergoing high-risk surgery: a field-testing study

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing high-risk surgery are at a risk of sudden deterioration of their health. This study aimed to examine the feasibility of the development of two patient decision aids (PtDAs) to assist patients undergoing high-risk surgeries in informed decision-making about their medical care in a crisis.

METHODS

This field testing implemented two PtDAs that met the international criteria developed by the researchers for patients before surgery. Study participants were patients scheduled to be admitted to the intensive care unit after surgery at one acute care hospital in Japan and their families. The study used a mixed-methods approach. The primary outcome was patients' decision satisfaction evaluated by the SURE test. Secondary outcomes were the perception of the need to discuss advance care planning (ACP) before surgery and mental health status. The families were also surveyed on their confidence in proxy decision-making (NRS: 0-10, quantitative data). In addition, interviews were conducted after discharge to assess the acceptability of PtDAs. Data were collected before (preoperative outpatients, baseline: T0) and after providing PtDAs (in the hospital: T1) and following discharge (T2, T3).

RESULTS

Nine patients were enrolled, of whom seven agreed to participate (including their families). The SURE test scores (mean ± SD) were 2.1 ± 1.2 (T0), 3.4 ± 0.8 (T2), and 3.9 ± 0.4 (T3). The need to discuss ACP before surgery was 8.7 ± 1.3 (T1) and 9.1 ± 0.9 (T2). The degree of confidence in family surrogate decision-making was 6.1 ± 2.5 (T0), 7.7 ± 1.4 (T1), and 8.1 ± 1.5 (T2). The patients reported that using PtDAs provided an opportunity to share their thoughts with their families and inspired them to start mapping their life plans. Additionally, patients wanted to share and discuss their decision-making process with medical professionals after the surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

PtDAs supporting ACP in patients undergoing high-risk surgery were developed, evaluated, and accepted. However, they did not involve any discussion of patients' ACP treatment wishes with their families. Medical providers should be coached to provide adequate support to patients. In the future, larger studies evaluating the effectiveness of PtDAs are necessary.

Patient Involvement in Anesthesia Decision-making: A Qualitative Study of Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Calls to better involve patients in decisions about anesthesia-e.g., through shared decision-making-are intensifying. However, several features of anesthesia consultation make it unclear how patients should participate in decisions. Evaluating the feasibility and desirability of carrying out shared decision-making in anesthesia requires better understanding of preoperative conversations. The objective of this qualitative study was to characterize how preoperative consultations for primary knee arthroplasty arrived at decisions about primary anesthesia.

METHODS

This focused ethnography was performed at a U.S. academic medical center. The authors audio-recorded consultations of 36 primary knee arthroplasty patients with eight anesthesiologists. Patients and anesthesiologists also participated in semi-structured interviews. Consultation and interview transcripts were coded in an iterative process to develop an explanation of how anesthesiologists and patients made decisions about primary anesthesia.

RESULTS

The authors found variation across accounts of anesthesiologists and patients as to whether the consultation was a collaborative decision-making scenario or simply meant to inform patients. Consultations displayed a number of decision-making patterns, from the anesthesiologist not disclosing options to the anesthesiologist strictly adhering to a position of equipoise; however, most consultations fell between these poles, with the anesthesiologist presenting options, recommending one, and persuading hesitant patients to accept it. Anesthesiologists made patients feel more comfortable with their proposed approach through extensive comparisons to more familiar experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

Anesthesia consultations are multifaceted encounters that serve several functions. In some cases, the involvement of patients in determining the anesthetic approach might not be the most important of these functions. Broad consideration should be given to both the applicability and feasibility of shared decision-making in anesthesia consultation. The potential benefits of interventions designed to enhance patient involvement in decision-making should be weighed against their potential to pull anesthesiologists' attention away from important humanistic aspects of communication such as decreasing patients' anxiety.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE