Improving perioperative outcomes: my journey into risk, patient preferences, guidelines, and performance measures: Ninth Honorary FAER Research Lecture

Association between preoperative evaluation with lung ultrasound and outcome in frail elderly patients undergoing orthopedic surgery for hip fractures: study protocol for an Italian multicenter observational prospective study (LUSHIP)

BACKGROUND

Hip fracture is one of the most common orthopedic causes of hospital admission in frail elderly patients. Hip fracture fixation in this class of patients is considered a high-risk procedure. Preoperative physical examination, plasma natriuretic peptide levels (BNP, Pro-BNP), and cardiovascular scoring systems (ASA-PS, RCRI, NSQIP-MICA) have all been demonstrated to underestimate the risk of postoperative complications. We designed a prospective multicenter observational study to assess whether preoperative lung ultrasound examination can predict better postoperative events thanks to the additional information they provide in the form of "indirect" and "direct" cardiac and pulmonary lung ultrasound signs.

METHODS

LUSHIP is an Italian multicenter prospective observational study. Patients will be recruited on a nation-wide scale in the 12 participating centers. Patients aged  >  65 years undergoing spinal anesthesia for hip fracture fixation will be enrolled. A lung ultrasound score (LUS) will be generated based on the examination of six areas of each lung and ascribing to each area one of the four recognized aeration patterns-each of which is assigned a subscore of 0, 1, 2, or 3. Thus, the total score will have the potential to range from a minimum of 0 to a maximum of 36. The association between 30-day postoperative complications of cardiac and/or pulmonary origin and the overall mortality will be studied. Considering the fact that cardiac complications in patients undergoing hip surgery occur in approx. 30% of cases, to achieve 80% statistical power, we will need a sample size of 877 patients considering a relative risk of 1.5.

CONCLUSIONS

Lung ultrasound (LU), as a tool within the anesthesiologist's armamentarium, is becoming increasingly widespread, and its use in the preoperative setting is also starting to become more common. Should the study demonstrate the ability of LU to predict postoperative cardiac and pulmonary complications in hip fracture patients, a randomized clinical trial will be designed with the scope of improving patient outcome. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04074876. Registered on August 30, 2019.

A matter of perspective - Objective versus subjective outcomes in the assessment of quality of recovery

Current post-operative recovery assessment exists as a dichotomy, maintaining objectivity whilst providing relevance to patient-centred care. Both objective and subjective measures are utilised in modern recovery assessment and are best viewed as complimentary. At institutional and provider levels, performance indicators are utilised as surrogates for quality of recovery but only if these indicators are assessed in the clinical context from which they are derived. Patient-reported outcomes prioritise the patient's perspective of symptoms and care, which are the most important aspects at the time of assessment but are limited by their susceptibility to response shift and recall bias. Ideally, quality of recovery is assessed using objective measures in concert with measures of clinical complexity and in parallel with patient-reported outcomes.

The Perioperative Surgical Home: how can it make the case so everyone wins?

BACKGROUND

Varied and fragmented care plans undertaken by different practitioners currently expose surgical patients to lapses in expected care, increase the chance for operational mistakes and accidents, and often result in unnecessary care. The Perioperative Surgical Home has thus been proposed by the American Society of Anesthesiologists and other stakeholders as an innovative, patient-centered, surgical continuity of care model that incorporates shared decision making. Topics central to the debate about an anesthesiology-based Perioperative Surgical Home include: holding the gains made in anesthesia-related patient safety; impacting surgical morbidity and mortality, including failure-to-rescue; achieving healthcare outcome metrics; assimilating comparative effectiveness research into the model; establishing necessary audit and data collection; a comparison with the hospitalist model of perioperative care; the perspective of the surgeon; the benefits of the Perioperative Surgical Home to the specialty of anesthesiology; and its associated healthcare economic advantages.

DISCUSSION

Improving surgical morbidity and mortality mandates a more comprehensive and integrated approach to the management of surgical patients. In their expanded capacity as the surgical patient's "perioperativist," anesthesiologists can play a key role in compliance with broader set of process measures, thus becoming a more vital and valuable provider from the patient, administrator, and payer perspective. The robust perioperative databases created within the Perioperative Surgical Home present new opportunities for health services and population-level research. The Perioperative Surgical Home is not intended to replace the surgeon's patient care responsibility, but rather leverage the abilities of the entire perioperative care team in the service of the patient. To achieve this goal, it will be necessary to expand the core knowledge, skills, and experience of anesthesiologists. Anesthesiologists will need to view becoming perioperative physicians as an expansion of the specialty, rather than an abdication of their traditional intraoperative role. The Perioperative Surgical Home will need to create strategic added value for a health system and payers. This added value will strengthen the position of anesthesiologists as they navigate and negotiate in the face of finite, if not decreasing fiscal resources.

SUMMARY

Broadening the anesthesiologist's scope of practice via the Perioperative Surgical Home may promote standardization and improve clinical outcomes and decrease resource utilization by providing greater patient-centered continuity of care throughout the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods.

The anesthesia team of the future

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review is aimed at highlighting the recent developments and opportunities that are likely to impact the anesthesia team of the future.

RECENT FINDINGS

The anesthesia team of the future aims to provide well tolerated, efficient, and cost-effective perioperative care. Certified and subspecialty trained anesthesiologists lead a diverse team of care providers in increasingly dissimilar environments. The spread of electronic health record systems has been the basis for the development of clinical decision support applications that promise to integrate quality control, enhanced efficiency, research opportunities, and improved patient care in the perioperative period. Perioperative epidemiology is a likely area of growth within the field of anesthesiology ultimately enabling the anesthesia team to translate precise real-time information into improved outcome.

SUMMARY

The anesthesia team of the future will require the anesthesiologist to provide expertise across the entire domain of perioperative medicine. Meaningful decision support systems rely on accurate data analysis and incorporation of current clinical guidelines and recommendations.