Predictors of Intraoperative Pressure Injury in Patients Undergoing Major Hepatobiliary Surgery

Incidence and Risk Factors for Perioperative Pressure Injuries: Prospective Descriptive Study

PURPOSE

Pressure injuries can often occur in patients undergoing surgical, diagnostic, or other invasive procedures, so it is important to assess patients in the perioperative period. This study was conducted to determine the incidence and risk factors of perioperative pressure injury.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional, prospective, and descriptive study.

METHODS

This study involved 158 patients who met the study's eligibility criteria between May 2022 and July 2022. The data were collected using the Patient Information Form, Munro Scale, Braden Scale, and pressure injury staging form. The patients were monitored postoperatively or for 3 days.

FINDINGS

Pressure injury developed in 13.9% of the patients. Perioperative risk factors were age, edema, mobilization time, parenteral nutrition, blood transfusion, and glucose level, while preoperative albumin level was lower in patients with pressure injury. In the postoperative period, the risk factors were duration of mobilization and transition to oral feeding, length of intensive care unit stay, and low Braden score. In multivariate analysis, the variables that showed significance with the risk of pressure injury were postoperative Munro score and edema.

CONCLUSIONS

It is crucial to evaluate the risk factors for pressure injury in patients who have undergone surgical procedures.

Evaluation of the risk prediction model of pressure injuries in hospitalized patient: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The main aim of this study is to synthesize the prevalent predictive models for pressure injuries in hospitalized patients, with the goal of identifying common predictive factors linked to pressure injuries in hospitalized patients. This endeavour holds the potential to provide clinical nurses with a valuable reference for providing targeted care to high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND

Pressure injuries (PIs) are a frequently occurring health problem throughout the world. There are mounting studies about risk prediction model of PIs reported and published. However, the prediction performance of the models is still unclear.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Chinese databases including CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), Wanfang Database, Weipu Database and CBM (China Biology Medicine).

METHODS

This systematic review was conducted following PRISMA recommendations. The databases of Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and CNKI, Weipu Database, Wanfang Database and CBM were searched for all studies published before September 2023. We included studies with cohort, case-control designs, reporting the development of risk model and have been validated externally and internally among the hospitalized patients. Two researchers selected the retrieved studies according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and critically evaluated the quality of studies based on the CHARMS checklist. The PRISMA guideline was used to report the systematic review and meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Sixty-two studies were included, which contained 99 pressure injuries risk prediction models. The AUC (area under ROC curve) of modelling in 32 prediction models were reported ranged from .70 to .99, while the AUC of verification in 38 models were reported ranged from .70 to .98. Gender (OR = 1.41, CI: .99 ~ 1.31), age (WMD = 8.81, CI: 8.11 ~ 9.57), diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.64, CI: 1.36 ~ 1.99), mechanical ventilation (OR = 2.71, CI: 2.05 ~ 3.57), length of hospital stay (WMD = 7.65, CI: 7.24 ~ 8.05) were the most common predictors of pressure injuries.

CONCLUSION

Studies of PIs risk prediction model in hospitalized patients had high research quality, and the risk prediction models also had good predictive performance. However, some of the included studies lacked of internal or external validation in modelling, which affected the stability and extendibility. The aged, male patient in ICU, albumin, haematocrit, low haemoglobin level, diabetes, mechanical ventilation and length of stay in hospital were high-risk factors for pressure injuries in hospitalized patients. In the future, it is recommended that clinical nurses, in practice, select predictive models with better performance to identify high-risk patients based on the actual situation and provide care targeting the high-risk factors to prevent the occurrence of diseases.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

The risk prediction model is an effective tool for identifying patients at the risk of developing PIs. With the help of risk prediction tool, nurses can identify the high-risk patients and common predictive factors, predict the probability of developing PIs, then provide specific preventive measures to improve the outcomes of these patients.

REGISTRATION NUMBER (PROSPERO)

CRD42023445258.

Risk Factors of Intraoperative Pressure Injury in Adult Patients Undergoing Neurologic Surgery

GENERAL PURPOSE

To present research investigating the incidence of and risk factors associated with intraoperative pressure injury in patients undergoing neurologic surgery at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University in China.

TARGET AUDIENCE

This continuing education activity is intended for physicians, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and registered nurses with an interest in skin and wound care.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES/OUTCOMES

After participating in this educational activity, the participant will:1. Identify the incidence of intraoperative pressure injuries (PIs) in patients undergoing neurologic surgery at Xiangya Hospital, Central South University in China.2. Describe risk factors for intraoperative PI.3. Outline strategies to help mitigate intraoperative PI risk.

The incidence of intraoperatively acquired pressure injuries in the park-bench position was reduced by applying soft silicone multilayer foam dressings

The Park-Bench Position (PBP) is associated with a high incidence rate of intraoperatively acquired pressure injuries (IAPIs). Preventive measures must be established to prevent the development of IAPIs. We investigated the risk factors for PBP by applying a soft silicone multilayered foam dressing (SMD) under core temperature management to prevent IAPIs. We conducted a prospective, single-centre, open-label observational study of patients undergoing elective neurosurgery operations using PBP in a university hospital in Japan. The incidence rate of IAPIs in this study was compared with that in our two previous studies, in which a film dressing was applied and core temperature management was not performed. IAPIs developed in 90 patients (6.7%); in the lateral thoracic region in five patients and the iliac crest region in one patient. The operative time (every 1 h: p = 0.0001, OR: odds ratio 3.62, 95% CI: confidence interval 1.73-11.42) was significantly associated with the incidence of IAPIs. In our two previous studies, the incidence rate of IAPIs was 11.0% and 24.1%, respectively, when film dressing was used. SMD may weaken the involvement of risk factors in IAPIs.

Retrospective evaluation of the effectiveness of using two different products in preventing the development of pressure injuries in patients undergoing lung lobectomy

AIM

This retrospective study aims to determine the impacts of two different products (barrier cream, barrier spray) routinely used before surgery on the development of postoperative pressure injuries in patients undergoing lung lobectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the study, the researchers retrospectively examined the data of 60 patients who underwent lobectomy in a university hospital's thoracic surgery clinic between 12.02.2021 and 14.02.2022. The patients were divided into two groups: those to whom a barrier cream was applied (30) and those to whom a barrier spray was applied. The Patient Description Form and the Braden Risk Assessment Tool were used in data collection. The Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests were conducted for statistical analyses.

RESULTS

In the study, the development rates of blanchable erythema and stage I pressure injuries in the sacral and dorsal regions were significantly higher in patients to whom a barrier spray was applied than in patients to whom a barrier cream was applied (p < 0.05). Pain intensity in the sacral and dorsal regions was significantly lower in patients to whom a barrier cream was applied than those to whom a barrier spray was applied (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Blanchable erythema and intraoperative pressure injury were observed less in patients in whom a barrier cream was used before surgery. Surgical nurses should first evaluate the risk in the preoperative period in the clinics and benefit from the use of barrier cream to prevent the development of blanchable erythema and intraoperative pressure injury.

Risk Factors Associated With Pressure Injuries in Surgical Patients: A Retrospective Case-Control Study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to identify predictive risk factors for pressure injury (PI) occurring during surgery.

DESIGN

Retrospective case-control study.

SUBJECTS AND SETTING

Data on records of 6070 patients hospitalized for surgery at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital located in Seoul Korea. Data were collected between May 2013 and December 2014.

METHODS

Anonymized data from patients were accessed via electronic health records, nursing records, direct patient assessment, surgical, clinical laboratory, and anesthesia records, preanesthesia status evaluations, and PI incident reports, and transfusion and extracorporeal circulation reports. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Three hundred eighty-one of the 6070 patients (6.3%) developed within 24 hours a PI that was associated with surgery. The most common locations for the PIs were the coccyx (15.1%; n = 75) and trunk (chest or abdomen; 15.1%; n = 75). All PIs were classified as stage 1 (66.6%; n = 331) or 2 (33.4%; n = 166). Based on logistic regression results, we found that the risk factors that were independently predictive of surgery-related PIs were patient position during surgery, admission to an intensive care unit after surgery, required blood transfusion during surgery, and duration of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This retrospective study identified several risk factors associated with a higher incidence of perioperative PIs in surgical patients. A PI prevention program accounting for these factors could potentially help prevent PIs and their costly complications.

Using Continuous Intraoperative Pressure Mapping to Describe Patterns of Tissue Interface Pressure

The purpose of this study was to describe patterns of intraoperative tissue interface pressure, identify the amount of time during which the pressure at four anatomical locations exceeded 32 mm Hg, and examine associations between patient- and surgery-related variables and peak tissue interface pressure. We used a pressure mapping system to measure the intraoperative tissue interface pressure of 150 patients. We implemented linear mixed-effects models to assess trends in the mean and peak tissue interface pressure. The percentage of time during which the interface pressure exceeded 32 mm Hg at the scapulae, interscapular area, and sacral area was 70%, 70%, and 90%, respectively. Body mass index, length of surgery, and intraoperative position were major predictors of increased pressure. Understanding patterns of tissue interface pressure of patients during surgery may help perioperative nurses develop strategies to attenuate pressure and protect skin integrity.

Relationship between predisposing and facilitating factors: Does it influence the risk of developing peri-operative pressure injuries?

This study examined the relationship between the personal predisposing factors of patients and the severity of pressure injuries (PIs) developed during surgery. This retrospective cohort study collected 439 cases of peri-operative PIs. Using binary logistic regression to identify the variables associated with PI severity, the effects of interactions between associated variables were then tested. The results of this study revealed that among the personal predisposing factors, only higher patient age (P = .001) and higher body mass index (P < .001) posed a greater risk of stage 2 PIs or higher. Among the surgery-related facilitating factors, only patients who were placed in the prone position during surgery and patients who lost ≥1000 mL of blood during surgery were at greater risk of stage 2 PIs or higher, compared, respectively, to those placed in the supine position and those who lost ≤100 mL of blood. Furthermore, the amount of blood lost during surgery moderated the influence of age on PI severity. For elderly patients who are expected to lose a large blood volume during surgery or lose an immeasurable amount of blood due to the use of cardiopulmonary bypass, taking more precautionary measures to prevent PIs is recommended.

Reported definitions of intraoperative hypotension in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia: a review

Background

Intraoperative hypotension (IOH) during non-cardiac surgery is common and associated with major adverse kidney, neurological and cardiac events and even death. Given that IOH is a modifiable risk factor for the mitigation of postoperative complications, it is imperative to generate a precise definition for IOH to facilitate strategies for avoiding or treating its occurrence. Moreover, a universal and consensus definition of IOH may also facilitate the application of novel and emerging therapeutic interventions in treating IOH. We conducted a review to systematically record the reported definitions of intraoperative hypotension in adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia.

Methods

In accordance with Cochrane guidelines, we searched three online databases (OVID [Medline], Embase and Cochrane Library) for all studies published from 1 January 2000 to 6 September 2020. We evaluated the number of studies that reported the absolute or relative threshold values for defining blood pressure. Secondary aims included evaluation of the threshold values for defining IOH, the methodology for accounting for the severity of hypotension, whether the type of surgical procedure influenced the definition of IOH, and whether a study whose definition of IOH aligned with the Perioperative Quality Initiative-3 workgroup (POQI) consensus statement for defining was more likely to be associated with determining an adverse postoperative outcome.

Results

A total of 318 studies were included in the final qualitative synthesis. Most studies (n = 249; 78.3%) used an absolute threshold to define hypotension; 150 (60.5%) reported SBP, 117 (47.2%) reported MAP, and 12 (4.8%) reported diastolic blood pressure (DBP). 126 (39.6%) used a relative threshold to define hypotension. Of the included studies, 153 (48.1%) did not include any duration variable in their definition of hypotension. Among the selected 318 studies 148 (46.5%) studies defined IOH according to the POQI statement. When studies used a “relative blood pressure change” to define IOH, there was a weaker association in detecting adverse postoperative outcomes compared to studies who reported “absolute blood pressure change” (χ²(2) = 10.508, P = 0.005, Cramér’s V = 0.182). When studies used the POQI statement definition of hypotension or defined IOH by values higher than the POQI statement definition there were statistical differences observed between IOH and adverse postoperative outcomes (χ²(1) = 6.581, P = 0.037, Cramér’s V = 0.144). When both the duration of IOH or the numbers of hypotensive epochs were evaluated, we observed a significantly stronger relationship between the definition of IOH use the development of adverse postoperative outcomes. (χ²(1) = 4.860, P = 0.027, Cramér’s V = 0.124).

Conclusions

Most studies defined IOH by absolute or relative changes from baseline values. There are substantial inconsistencies in how IOH was reported. Further, definitions differed across different surgical specialities. Our findings further suggest that IOH should be defined using the absolute values stated in the POQI statement i.e., MAP < 60–70 mmHg or SBP < 100 mmHg. Finally, the number of hypotensive epochs or time-weighted duration of IOH should also be reported.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01605-9.

The Swedish version of the attitude towards pressure ulcer prevention instrument for use in an operating room context (APUP-OR): A nationwide psychometric evaluation

INTRODUCTION

To assess operating room (OR) nurses' attitudes towards pressure ulcer prevention, the Attitude towards Pressure Ulcer Prevention (APuP) instrument was developed.

AIM

The aim of this study was to psychometrically evaluate the Attitude towards Pressure Ulcer Prevention (APuP) instrument in a Swedish OR context.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A psychometric evaluation study was conducted, using a convenience sample, between February and August 2020. Validity (content, construct, discriminatory power) and reliability (stability and internal consistency) were evaluated.

RESULTS

The first survey (test) was completed by 284 Swedish OR nurses, of whom n = 50 (17.6%) completed the second survey (retest). A Principal Component Analysis was conducted for the 13-item instrument. The KMO value for this model was 0.62. Bartlett's test for sphericity was statistically significant (p 0.001). Five factors were identified which accounted for 56% of the variance in responses related to attitudes toward pressure ulcer prevention. The Cronbach's α for the instrument "attitude towards Pressure Ulcer Prevention" was 0.66. The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.49 (95% CI = 0.25-0.67).

CONCLUSION

This Swedish version of the APuP- OR is the first step in the development of an instrument to measure OR nurses' attitudes towards PU prevention in a Swedish OR context. The reliability of the instrument was low and the validity moderate. A larger sample and the revision or addition of items related to the context of the operating room should be considered in order to confirm aspects of the psychometric properties.

Identification of Risk Factors for Intraoperative Acquired Pressure Injury in Patients Undergoing Neurosurgery: A Retrospective Single-Center Study

BACKGROUND Risk factors for intraoperative acquired pressure injury (IAPI) in patients undergoing various surgical procedures have been described in previous studies. However, whether risk factors for IAPI in patients undergoing neurosurgery differ remains unknown. The aim of the present study was to explore independent risk factors for IAPI in patients undergoing neurosurgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS Data from 465 patients who underwent neurosurgery between October 2017and December 2018 and who were at high risk of IAPIs were retrospectively analyzed. Independent risk factors for IAPI were evaluated using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. RESULTS Sixty-nine IAPIs (14.8%) in 465 patients undergoing neurosurgery were assessed. Multivariate logistic regression analyses showed that being overweight (odds ratio [OR] 2.685; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.206-5.975; P=0.016), prone position (OR 7.502, 95% CI 2.470-22.787. P<0.001), lateral position (OR 15.301, 95% CI 4.903-47.753, P<0.001), use of a head frame (OR 3.716, 95% CI 1.431-9.653, P=0.007), surgical times of 4 to 8 h (OR 7.276, 95% CI 2.249-23.542, P<0.001), and surgical times ≥8 h (OR 173.248, 95% CI 32.629-919.896, P<0.001) all were associated with an increased risk of IAPI in patients undergoing neurosurgery. The factors associated with reduced risk of IAPI were high serum albumin levels (OR 0.099, 95% CI 0.016-0.608, P=0.013) and use of memory sponge pads (OR 0.064, 95% CI 0.020-0.202, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS The present study indicates that being overweight, prone and lateral positioning, use of a head frame, and longer surgical times are associated with an increased risk of IAPI in patients undergoing neurosurgery. Prospective studies should be conducted to verify these findings and consideration should be given to use of these factors in clinical practice to identify high-risk patients.

Knowledge and practices of operating room nurses in the prevention of pressure injuries

BACKGROUND

Operating room (OR) nurses play an important role in preventing the pressure injuries (PIs) that may develop during the perioperative process. This study was conducted to determine OR nurses' level of knowledge about PIs, and how they manage them.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional, quantitative and descriptive study. The sample of the study consisted of 234 OR nurses working in eight different public hospitals in Ankara. The questionnaire applied in this study was prepared in accordance with the guidelines. This questionnaire consisted of three sections: demographic profiling, common preventive practices, and the knowledge of OR nurses about intraoperative PI prevention.

FINDINGS

66.7% of the participants had received education about PIs during their basic nursing training, and 41.5% had received education after graduation. 97.4% of OR nurses did not follow international guidelines about PIs. The mean total score of the OR nurses for the questions about PIs was 52.0 ± 13.7 out of a possible score of 100. The lowest mean score was obtained for the topic of 'staging pressure injuries', and the highest score was obtained from 'interventions to prevent pressure injuries'. In addition, 81.5% of the OR nurses stated that they were not given information about patients with a high PI risk by clinical nurses. 97.9% of the OR nurses did not use a scale to assess intraoperative PI risks. Fewer than half of the nurses said that they assessed the risk of PIs during surgery. 90.8% the nurses did not record risk assessment and interventions to prevent PIs.

CONCLUSION

There is a need to incorporate basic operating room PI (ORPI) training into both the basic nursing and in-service training to improve the knowledge of OR nurses about how to prevent and manage ORPIs. In addition, measures to assess PI risk and prevent ORPI should be included in institutional policies and procedures.

Angiosomal Vascular Occlusions, Deep-Tissue Pressure Injuries, and Competing Theories: A Case Report

ABSTRACT

Compression of the soft tissue between a support surface and a bony prominence has long been the accepted primary mechanism of pressure injury (PrI) formation, with the belief that said compression leads to capillary occlusion, ischemia, and tissue necrosis. This explanation presupposes an "outside-in" pathophysiologic process of tissue damage originating at the local capillary level. Despite advances in prevention protocols, there remains a stubbornly consistent incidence of severe PrIs including deep-tissue injuries, the latter usually evolving into stage 4 PrIs with exposed bone or tendon. This article presents just such a perioperative case with the aim of providing further evidence that these more severe PrIs may result from ischemic insults of a named vessel within specific vascular territories (labeled as angiosomes). Pressure is indeed a factor in the formation of severe PrIs, but these authors postulate that the occlusion occurred at the level of a named artery proximal to the lesion. This vascular event was likely attributable to low mean arterial pressure. The authors suggest that the terminology proposed three decades ago to call both deep-tissue injuries and stage 4 PrIs "vascular occlusion pressure injuries" should be the topic of further research and expert consensus.

Association of intraoperative hypotension with postoperative morbidity and mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Intraoperative hypotension, with varying definitions in literature, may be associated with postoperative complications. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the association of intraoperative hypotension with postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane databases were searched for studies published between January 1990 and August 2018. The primary endpoints were postoperative overall morbidity and mortality. Secondary endpoints were postoperative cardiac outcomes, acute kidney injury, stroke, delirium, surgical outcomes and combined outcomes. Subgroup analyses, sensitivity analyses and a meta-regression were performed to test the robustness of the results and to explore heterogeneity.

Results

The search identified 2931 studies, of which 29 were included in the meta-analysis, consisting of 130 862 patients. Intraoperative hypotension was associated with an increased risk of morbidity (odds ratio (OR) 2.08, 95 per cent confidence interval 1.56 to 2.77) and mortality (OR 1.94, 1.32 to 2.84). In the secondary analyses, intraoperative hypotension was associated with cardiac complications (OR 2.44, 1.52 to 3.93) and acute kidney injury (OR 2.69, 1.31 to 5.55). Overall heterogeneity was high, with an I² value of 88 per cent. When hypotension severity, outcome severity and study population variables were added to the meta-regression, heterogeneity was reduced to 50 per cent.

Conclusion

Intraoperative hypotension during non-cardiac surgery is associated with postoperative cardiac and renal morbidity, and mortality. A universally accepted standard definition of hypotension would facilitate further research into this topic.

Postoperative pressure injuries in adults having surgery under general anaesthesia: systematic review of perioperative risk factors

BACKGROUND

Pressure injuries (PIs) after surgery affect thousands of people worldwide. Their management is expensive, a cost that can be reduced with proper preventive measures. Patients having surgery under general anaesthesia are at risk of developing PI, yet no specific tool has been developed to assess the risk in these patients. This review aimed to summarize the published data on perioperative risk factors associated with the development of PI in adults having surgery under general anaesthesia.

METHODS

All studies reporting on risk factors associated with the development of PI were included. Data were extracted from all articles and meta-analysis was performed when three or more studies reported on a specific variable.

RESULTS

The analysis identified five factors significantly associated with the development of PIs: cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes mellitus, low haemoglobin level and longer duration of surgery. Factors not associated included serum albumin concentration, use of vasopressors during surgery, use of corticosteroids, sex and age.

CONCLUSION

Cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes mellitus, anaemia and duration of surgery should be taken into consideration when trying to identify surgical patients at high risk of developing PIs. These factors could be used to predict PIs after surgery.

Revalidation of a Perioperative Risk Assessment Measure for Skin

BACKGROUND

Validated perioperative pressure injury (PI) risk assessment measures are few and often cumbersome to complete, leading to missed opportunities to identify and target prevention interventions to those patients at increased risk for developing a postsurgical PI.

OBJECTIVES

Previous validation of a six-item perioperative risk assessment measure for skin (PRAMS) was conducted in our community hospital with positive findings. The purpose of this study was to increase generalizability by revalidating the PRAMS in a larger sample.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review of all surgical patients aged ≥18 years positioned in the supine or lateral position in a Midwest quaternary care, multispecialty, 1,500-bed hospital during a 6-month period (n = 1,526). The intent of the study was to revalidate the PRAMS. The main outcome of interest was the development of PI after surgery. Risk indicators of interest included diabetes, age, surgical time, Braden score, previous surgery, and preexisting PI. The diagnostic ability of any of the risk indicators on the development of a postsurgical PI was evaluated using sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values.

RESULTS

Postsurgical PIs occurred in 121 patients. Comparing current to previous study results, the PRAMS was effective in identifying surgical patients at risk for PI (sensitivity = .98). Those patients with a postsurgical PI had a lower mean Braden score, were more likely to have a preexisting PI, and were more likely to have a previous surgery during the same admission (p < .001 for all risk indicators), comparing favorably to the original study. Patients without risk indicators were unlikely to develop a postsurgical PI (negative predictive value = .98).

DISCUSSION

Results of this validation study demonstrate that the PRAMS is effective in identifying patients who developed a postsurgical PI using information readily available to the perioperative staff.

Alternating Pressure Overlay for Prevention of Intraoperative Pressure Injury

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a low-profile alternating pressure (AP) overlay system on hospital-acquired pressure injuries (HAPIs).

DESIGN

Prospective case series with historical controls.

SUBJECTS AND SETTING

The study setting was the operating room and critical care unit of an urban quaternary care hospital in the Midwestern United States. One hundred neurosurgery patients undergoing surgery for 2 hours or longer in supine position were included in the study (AP group). The outcomes for the AP group were compared to a historical control group of 292 patients.

METHODS

A group of 100 patients were prospectively placed on the AP overlay during surgery. Participants were enrolled preoperatively and tracked by the research team during their hospital stay. Demographic data, details of the operation, and pressure injury risk factors were recorded. Following surgery, AP group patients were evaluated daily and continued on standard protocol for pressure injury prevention. The primary study outcome was HAPI rate during the perioperative period (up to 5 days postsurgery) for the AP group (plus standard of care) compared to the standard of care alone (historical control). Control group data were extracted from electronic health records for the prior 2 years. A written questionnaire was given to the care team that used the AP technology; items queried the degree of acceptance of the overlay by surgeons and the operating room and intensive care unit (ICU) staff.

RESULTS

None of the patients in the AP group developed perioperative pressure injuries. Review of historical control group revealed a 6% perioperative pressure injury incidence (18 pressure injuries in a group of 292 patients). Responses on the written questionnaire indicated that the AP technology was well accepted by surgeons and the operating room and ICU staff. There were no adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Study findings suggest that AP overlay system can safely and reliably be used during neurological surgeries. Findings further suggest that using the AP product may improve outcomes with respect to perioperative HAPIs, including patients deemed at high risk for pressure injury development. Further studies are underway to evaluate the use of this AP overlay system beyond the operating room for more comprehensive care.

Anesthetic challenges and outcomes for procedures in the intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging suite: A systematic review

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Hybrid operating room suites with intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging enable image guided surgery in a fully functional operating room environment. While this environment creates challenges to anesthetic care, the effects on anesthetic adverse events and outcomes are largely unknown. This systematic scoping review aims to map the existing knowledge about anesthetic care in advanced imaging hybrid operating rooms.

METHODS

A broad-based literature search was performed using the PubMed (Medline), Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases. References published in English between January 1994 and August 2017 were included. Quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE guidelines.

RESULTS

Forty-seven manuscripts were eligible for data collection. Adverse events were heterogeneously defined across 17 manuscripts and occurred in 0 to 100% (quality of evidence mostly very low). Monitoring difficulty was reported in 4 manuscripts of very low data quality. Interference between the magnet and the electrocardiogram was investigated in 2 manuscripts (quality of evidence low and very low, respectively). None of the reported events appeared to result in long-term patient harm. Author recommendations or a narrative review of the literature were provided in 40 manuscripts. Common safety concerns included lower equipment reliability, inaccessibility of the patient and airway, and the relative isolation of the suite (in relationship to other anesthesia care areas). Most authors also emphasized the importance of safety checklists, protocols, and provider training.

DISCUSSION

While intraoperative magnetic resonance imaging hybrid operating rooms are increasingly utilized, the existing literature does not allow estimating adverse event rates in this location. Prospective studies quantifying the effect of the environment on anesthesia outcomes are lacking. Despite this, there is a broad consensus regarding the anesthetic and safety concerns. More research is needed to inform practice standards and training requirements for this challenging environment.

A prediction tool for hospital-acquired pressure ulcers among surgical patients: Surgical pressure ulcer risk score

Surgical patients are prone to developing hospital-acquired pressure ulcers (HAPU). Therefore, a better prediction tool is needed to predict risk using preoperative data. This study aimed to determine, from previously published HAPU risk factors, which factors are significant among our surgical population and to develop a prediction tool that identifies pressure ulcer risk before the operation. A literature review was first performed to elicit all the published HAPU risk factors before conducting a retrospective case-control study using medical records. The known HAPU risks were compared between patients with HAPU and without HAPU who underwent operations during the same period (July 2015-December 2016). A total of 80 HAPU cases and 189 controls were analysed. Multivariate logistic regression analyses identified eight significant risk factors: age ≥ 75 years, female gender, American Society of Anaesthesiologists ≥ 3, body mass index < 23, preoperative Braden score ≤ 14, anaemia, respiratory disease, and hypertension. The model had bootstrap-corrected c-statistic 0.78 indicating good discrimination. A cut-off score of ≥6 is strongly predictive, with a positive predictive value of 73.2% (confidence interval [CI]: 59.7%-84.2%) and a negative predictive value of 80.7% (CI: 74.3%-86.1%). SPURS contributes to the preoperative identification of pressure ulcer risk that could help nurses implement preventive measures earlier.