Shared decision-making in peri-operative medicine: a narrative review

Feasibility of interdisciplinary evaluation in non-arthritic hip pain: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND

Physical therapy and orthopaedic surgery are two common treatments for non-arthritic hip pain. Interdisciplinary evaluation across these disciplines may produce a more supportive treatment-planning process; however, the feasibility of such an evaluation remains unknown.

HYPOTHESIS OBJECTIVE

To assess the feasibility of an interdisciplinary evaluation with an orthopaedic surgeon and physical therapist for non-arthritic hip pain.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational feasibility study of a randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

Participants were randomized to an interdisciplinary (surgeon + physical therapist) or standard (surgeon) evaluation in a hip preservation clinic. Recruitment rate was recorded. Retention rate was calculated for all variables of interest. Enrollment and refusal reasons were recorded as patient quotes and categorized by a single grader. Time spent in clinic was compared across groups using Mann Whitney U tests (P ≤ 0.05). Study clinicians were interviewed, and responses were categorized based on pre-determined themes.

RESULTS

Eighty-one percent of eligible patients enrolled over a 15-month recruitment period. Willingness(n = 16), urgency to resolve pain(n = 10), financial compensation(n = 1), interest in research(n = 42), physical therapy(n = 6), or multiple-provider care(n = 15) were participants' enrollment reasons; reason was not recorded for 22 participants. Time(n = 11), preference for single-provider care(n = 6), current physical therapy treatment(n = 1), and disinterest in physical therapy(n = 7) or research(n = 2) were refusal reasons of patients who did not enroll. Retention for primary variables of interest was 100% in both groups. Participants spent, on average, 23.5 min more time in clinic for the interdisciplinary evaluation compared to the standard (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

An interdisciplinary evaluation for patients with non-arthritic hip pain that included a physical therapist and orthopaedic surgeon in a hip preservation clinic was feasible and may better inform the treatment planning process.

Shared decision-making training embedded in undergraduate and postgraduate medical education: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This review mapped the published literature on shared decision-making (SDM) training embedded in undergraduate and/or postgraduate medical education.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review following the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley. We searched ten databases and Google Scholar and manual searched reference list in included articles. Two researchers independently screened articles and extracted data. A narrative synthesis was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

This review identified 27 studies describing 25 unique SDM programs. Most programs integrated SDM training in undergraduate education, encompassing an overview of SDM theories and enhancing skills through role-plays. The programs duration ranged from one to 24 h. Overall, they improved students' SDM knowledge, attitude, confidence and skills, but the impact for students on patients is unclear due to lack of long-term follow-up.

CONCLUSION

The current SDM programs appear to be effectiveness in achieving short-term SDM-related outcomes. These programs were heterogeneous in their content, duration and delivery. Future research should concentrate on exploring the long-term impact of SDM programs, particularly students' application of SDM practices and patient outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Embedding SDM training in undergraduate and/or postgraduate medical education may be a practical and effective solution for current barriers to the widespread adoption of SDM.

Extended-duration thromboprophylaxis following major abdominopelvic surgery - For everyone or selected cases only?

Major abdominopelvic surgery is an important risk factor for postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE). VTE is the leading cause of 30-day postoperative mortality in patients with cancer undergoing major abdominopelvic surgery. Randomized controlled trials have shown that extended duration thromboprophylaxis using a low molecular weight heparin or a direct oral anticoagulant significantly decreases the risk of overall VTE (symptomatic events and asymptomatic deep vein thrombosis). Hence, several clinical practice guidelines suggest the use of extended duration thromboprophylaxis for all high-risk patients undergoing major abdominopelvic surgery. Despite these recommendations by clinical practice guidelines, adoption of extended duration thromboprophylaxis in clinical practice remains low and clinical equipoise seems to persist. In this narrative review, we aim is to highlight and summarize the reasons that may explain discrepancy between clinical guideline recommendations and current practice regarding extended duration thromboprophylaxis in this patient population. We also aim to review different personalized approaches based on patients' individualized risk of VTE that may foster shared decision making and improve patient outcomes by reducing decisional conflict, increasing patient knowledge, and increasing risk perception accuracy.

Preparing for and Not Waiting for Surgery

Cancer surgery is an essential treatment strategy but can disrupt patients' physical and psychological health. With worldwide demand for surgery expected to increase, this review aims to raise awareness of this global public health concern, present a stepwise framework for preoperative risk evaluation, and propose the adoption of personalised prehabilitation to mitigate risk. Perioperative medicine is a growing speciality that aims to improve clinical outcome by preparing patients for the stress associated with surgery. Preparation should begin at contemplation of surgery, with universal screening for established risk factors, physical fitness, nutritional status, psychological health, and, where applicable, frailty and cognitive function. Patients at risk should undergo a formal assessment with a qualified healthcare professional which informs meaningful shared decision-making discussion and personalised prehabilitation prescription incorporating, where indicated, exercise, nutrition, psychological support, 'surgery schools', and referral to existing local services. The foundational principles of prehabilitation can be adapted to local context, culture, and population. Clinical services should be co-designed with all stakeholders, including patient representatives, and require careful mapping of patient pathways and use of multi-disciplinary professional input. Future research should optimise prehabilitation interventions, adopting standardised outcome measures and robust health economic evaluation.

Systems of Care Delivery and Optimization in the Preoperative Arena

Key elements of an effective preoperative process include the following: history-taking, risk assessment, shared decision making, effective interdisciplinary communication, preoperative optimization of modifiable conditions, longitudinal care coordination, contribution to population health aims, and collection of outcomes-driven metrics. Perioperative medicine tenets can be applied by health systems of all sizes and demographics to improve quality and safety.

Opportunities for shared decision-making about major surgery with high-risk patients: a multi-method qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the opportunities for shared decision-making when older high-risk patients are offered major surgery. This study examines how, when, and why clinicians and patients can share decision-making about major surgery.

METHODS

This was a multi-method qualitative study, combining video recordings of preoperative consultations, interviews, and focus groups (33 patients, 19 relatives, 36 clinicians), with observations and documentary analysis in clinics in five hospitals in the UK undertaking major orthopaedic, colorectal, and/or cardiac surgery.

RESULTS

Three opportunities for shared decision-making about major surgery were identified. Resolution-focused consultations (cardiac/colorectal) resulted in a single agreed preferred option related to a potentially life-threatening problem, with limited opportunities for shared decision-making. Evaluative and deliberative consultations offered more opportunity. The former focused on assessing the likelihood of benefits of surgery for a presenting problem that was not a threat to life for the patient (e.g., orthopaedic consultations) and the latter (largely colorectal) involved discussion of a range of options while also considering significant comorbidities and patient preferences. The extent to which opportunities for shared decision-making were available, and taken up by surgeons, was influenced by the nature of the presenting problem, clinical pathway, and patient trajectory.

CONCLUSIONS

Decisions about major surgery were not always shared between patients and doctors. The nature of the presenting problem, comorbidities, clinical pathways, and patient trajectories all informed the type of consultation and opportunities for sharing decision-making. Our findings have implications for clinicians, with shared decision-making about major surgery most feasible when the focus is on life-enhancing treatment.

Shared Decision-Making in Acute Pain Services

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The implementation of shared decision-making (SDM) in acute pain services (APS) is still in its infancies especially when compared to other medical fields.

RECENT FINDINGS

Emerging evidence fosters the value of SDM in various acute care settings. We provide an overview of general SDM practices and possible advantages of incorporating such concepts in APS, point out barriers to SDM in this setting, present common patient decisions aids developed for APS and discuss opportunities for further development. Especially in the APS setting, patient-centred care is a key component for optimal patient outcome. SDM could be included into everyday clinical practice by using structured approaches such as the "seek, help, assess, reach, evaluate" (SHARE) approach, the 3 "MAking Good decisions In Collaboration"(MAGIC) questions, the "Benefits, Risks, Alternatives and doing Nothing"(BRAN) tool or the "the multifocal approach to sharing in shared decision-making"(MAPPIN'SDM) as guidance for participatory decision-making. Such tools aid in the development of a patient-clinician relationship beyond discharge after immediate relief of acute pain has been accomplished. Research addressing patient decision aids and their impact on patient-reported outcomes regarding shared decision-making, organizational barriers and new developments such as remote shared decision-making is needed to advance participatory decision-making in acute pain services.

Modern preoperative evaluation in ambulatory surgery - who, where and how?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Ambulatory surgery is increasingly performed in medically complex patients. This dynamic environment requires new approaches to ensure cost-effective, efficient, and ultimately safe preoperative evaluation of the patient. This review investigates recent advances in the assessment of ambulatory patients, with a special focus on patient screening, digital communication, and multidisciplinary team evaluation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Identifying suitable candidates for ambulatory surgery relies on a variety of medical, surgical, and institutional factors. Identification of high-risk patients and optimization of their treatment can be achieved through multidisciplinary protocols specific to the local institution and in line with current guidelines. Virtual assessment may be sufficient for most patients and provide an efficient evaluation strategy and high patient satisfaction. Prescreening can be supported by preoperative nursing teams.

SUMMARY

The increasing complexity of treatment provided in day surgery offers a unique opportunity to highlight the importance of anesthesiology staff as perioperative caregivers. Preoperative evaluation serves as a central junction to integrate a variety of surgical, medical, and institutional factors to provide safe, satisfactory, and efficient care for patients. Implementing technological innovation to streamline and facilitate this process is paramount.

Frailty and emergency surgery: identification and evidence-based care for vulnerable older adults

Frailty is a multidimensional state related to accumulation of age- and disease-related deficits across multiple domains. Older people represent the fastest growing segment of the peri-operative population, and 25-50% of older surgical patients live with frailty. When frailty is present before surgery, adjusted rates of morbidity and mortality increase at least two-fold; the odds of delirium and loss of independence are increased more than four- and five-fold, respectively. Care of the older person with frailty presenting for emergency surgery requires individualised and evidence-based care given the high-risk and complex nature of their presentations. Before surgery, frailty should be assessed using a multidimensional frailty instrument (most likely the Clinical Frailty Scale), and all members of the peri-operative team should be aware of each patient's frailty status. When frailty is present, pre-operative care should focus on documenting and communicating individualised risk, considering advanced care directives and engaging shared decision-making when feasible. Shared multidisciplinary care should be initiated. Peri-operatively, analgesia that avoids polypharmacy should be provided, along with delirium prevention strategies and consideration of postoperative care in a monitored environment. After the acute surgical episode, transition out of hospital requires that adequate support be in place, along with clear discharge instructions, and review of new and existing prescription medications. Advanced care directives should be reviewed or initiated in case of readmission. Overall, substantial knowledge gaps about the optimal peri-operative care of older people with frailty must be addressed through robust, patient-oriented research.

Autonomous patient consent for anaesthesia without preoperative consultation: a qualitative feasibility study including low-risk procedures

Background

Informed consent for anaesthesia is mandatory and requires provision of information and subsequent consent during consultation between anaesthesiologist and patient. Although information can be provided in an electronic format, it is unknown whether this a valid substitute for a consultation. We explored whether provision of digital information is equivalent to oral consultation and whether it enables patients to give electronic informed consent (e-consent) for anaesthesia.

Methods

Qualitative feasibility study using semi-structured interviews in 20 low-risk adults scheduled for minor surgery under general anaesthesia or procedural sedation at a university hospital. Data were analysed using a thematic content analysis approach. During the interviews, patients followed an application that provides information and subsequent e-consenting.

Results

The mean age was 50 yr and patients had good digital skills. Fifteen patients (75%) had previous experience of anaesthesia. The digital application provided enough information for all patients, but eight (40%) preferred consultation with an anaesthesiologist, mainly for personal contact. Patients had different information needs, with previous experiences leading to lower information needs. Nineteen patients had sufficient information to consent autonomously. Most patients considered separate anaesthesia consent superfluous to the surgical consent.

Conclusion

The digital application provided sufficient information and patients valued the information offered and the advantage of processing information at their own pace. This information made patients feel empowered to autonomously consent to anaesthesia without consultation. Remarkably, consent for anaesthesia was considered unimportant, because patients felt they had 'no choice' if they wanted to undergo surgery.

Future Perspectives on Prehabilitation Interventions in Cancer Surgery

OBJECTIVE

This article provides a map of key knowledge gaps regarding the evidence supporting prehabilitation and its integration with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programs. Filling this lack of knowledge with future research will further establish the effectiveness of prehabilitation.

DATA SOURCES

These are electronic databases including PubMed and CINAHL.

CONCLUSION

Future efforts must embrace the elderly frail or cognitively impaired patient with specific needs to further promote restoration of postoperative function throughout the surgical pathway. Prehabilitation should be coupled and integrated within the existent concept of the ERAS framework, to facilitate the continuous evolution of screening, assessment, and optimization of high-risk surgical patients who are at risk of not being restored to physical and psychological function after surgery, including independence.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

In the future, the ERAS nurse will be an essential figure of the prehabilitation program, proactively coordinating the assessment, optimization, and adjustment of perioperative comorbidity and guiding the rehabilitation process to improve patients' outcomes. These skills and characteristics will be required to provide optimal nursing care in the context of an integrated prehabilitation ERAS pathway.

Evaluation of electronic screening in the preoperative process

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Rising patient numbers, with increasing complexity, challenge the sustainability of the current preoperative process. We evaluated whether an electronic screening application can distinguish patients that need a preoperative consultation from low-risk patients that can be first seen on the day of surgery.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

Preoperative clinic of a tertiary academic hospital.

PATIENTS

1395 adult patients scheduled for surgery or procedural sedation.

INTERVENTIONS

We assessed a novel electronic preoperative screening application which consists of a questionnaire with a maximum of 185 questions regarding the patient's medical history and current state of health. The application provides an extensive health report, including an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA-PS) classification and a recommendation for either consultation by an anesthesiologist at the preoperative clinic or approval for screening on the day of surgery.

MEASUREMENTS

The recommendation of the electronic screening system was compared with the regular preoperative assessment using measures of diagnostic accuracy and agreement. Secondary outcomes included ASA-PS classification, patient satisfaction, and the anesthesiologists' opinion on the completeness and quality of the screening report.

RESULTS

Sensitivity to detect patients who needed additional consultation was 97.5% (95%CI 91.2-99.7) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.08 (95%CI 0.02-0.32). 407 (29.2%) patients were approved for surgery by both electronic screening and anesthesiologist. In 909 (65.2%) cases, the electronic screening system recommended further consultation while the anesthesiologist approved the patient (specificity 30.9% (95%CI 28.4-33.5); poor level of agreement (ĸ = 0.04)). Agreement regarding ASA-PS classification scores was weak (ĸ = 0.48). The majority of patients (78.0%) felt positive about electronic screening replacing the regular preoperative assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Electronic screening can reliably identify patients who can have their first contact with an anesthesiologist on the day of surgery, potentially allowing a major proportion of patients to safely bypass the preoperative clinic.

Addressing comorbidities in the perioperative setting and optimizing perioperative medicine education

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Preoperative clinics and patient optimization are examples of collaborative, multidisciplinary care pathways that create value. This article reviews current literature to demonstrate the importance of preoperative enhancement of patients' cognitive and functional status. This article underscores the importance of formal training in multidisciplinary topics, such as frailty, brain health, and shared decision-making for anesthesiology house staff.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preoperative cognitive screening of older patients is a valuable metric for risk stratification and detection of patients at risk of postoperative delirium. Frailty is another syndrome that can be identified and optimized preoperatively. Sarcopenia has been shown to correlate with frailty; this shows promise as a method to detect frailty preoperatively.

SUMMARY

Anesthesiologists as perioperative physicians are in a unique position to lead and coordinate interdisciplinary conversations that incorporate patient goal concordant care and realistic assessment of perioperative complications. Formal house staff training in early recognition and management of patients at risk of adverse outcomes in the short and long term postoperatively improves patient outcomes and decreases healthcare spending.

An audit of perioperative end-of-life care practices and documentation relating to patients who died in a surgical unit in three Victorian hospitals

The number of older, frail patients undergoing surgery is increasing, prompting consideration of the benefits of intensive treatment. Despite collaborative decision-making processes such as advance care planning being supported by recent Australian legislation, their role in perioperative care is yet to be defined. Furthermore, there has been little evaluation of the quality of end-of-life care in the surgical population. We investigated documentation of the premorbid functional status, severity of illness, intensity of treatment, operative management and quality of end-of-life care in patients who died in a surgical unit, with a retrospective study of surgical mortality which was performed across three hospitals over a 23-month period in Victoria, Australia. Among 99 deceased patients in the study cohort, 68 had a surgical operation. Preoperative functional risk assessment by medical staff was infrequently documented in the medical notes (5%) compared with activities of daily living (69%) documented by nursing staff. Documented preoperative discussions regarding the risk of death were rarely and inconsistently done, but when done were extensive. Documented end-of-life care discussions were identified in 71%, but were frequently brief, inconsistent, and in 60% did not occur until 48 hours from death. In 35.4% of instances, documented discussions involved junior staff (registrars or residents), and 43.4% involved intensive care unit staff. Palliative or terminal care referrals also occurred late (1-2 days prior to death). Not-for-resuscitation orders were frequently changed when approaching the end of life. Overall, 57% of deceased patients had a documented opportunity for farewell with family. We conclude that discussions and documentation of end-of-life care practices could be improved and recommend that all surgical units undertake similar audits to ensure that end-of-life care discussions occur for high-risk and palliative care surgical patients and are documented appropriately.

Patient and caregiver preferences and prioritized outcomes for cardiac surgery: A scoping review and consultation workshop

OBJECTIVE(S)

In light of the absence of patient and caregiver input in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Cardiac Surgery guideline development, we conducted a scoping review to identify patient and caregiver preferences and prioritized outcomes related to perioperative care in cardiac surgery and its lifelong impact.

METHODS

Five electronic databases were searched to retrieve studies investigating patient or caregiver preferences and prioritized outcomes. Information was charted in duplicate and analyzed using descriptive statistics or thematic analysis. A patient and caregiver consultation workshop validated scoping review findings and solicited novel preferences and outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 5292 articles retrieved, 43 met inclusion criteria. Most were from Europe (n = 19, 44%) or North America (n = 15, 35%) and qualitative and quantitative designs were represented in equal proportions. Fifty-two methods were used to obtain stakeholder preferences and prioritized outcomes, the majority being qualitative in nature (n = 32, 61%). Based on the collective preferences of 3772 patients and caregivers from the review and 17 from the consultation workshop, a total of 108 patient preferences, 32 caregiver preferences, and 19 prioritized outcomes were identified. The most commonly identified theme was "information and education." Improved quality of life was the most common patient-prioritized outcome, and all caregiver-prioritized outcomes were derived from the consultation workshop.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient and caregiver preferences overlap with Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Cardiac Surgery recommendations targeting preoperative risk reduction strategies, prehabilitation, patient engagement technology, and intra- and postoperative strategies to reduce discomfort. To support clinical practice, future research should investigate associations with key surgical outcomes.

Practitioners' views on shared decision-making implementation: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Shared decision-making (SDM) refers to the collaboration between patients and their healthcare providers to make clinical decisions based on evidence and patient preferences, often supported by patient decision aids (PDAs). This study explored practitioner experiences of SDM in a context where SDM has been successfully implemented. Specifically, we focused on practitioners' perceptions of SDM as a paradigm, factors influencing implementation success, and outcomes.

METHODS

We used a qualitative approach to examine the experiences and perceptions of 10 Danish practitioners at a cancer hospital experienced in SDM implementation. A semi-structured interview format was used and interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Data was analyzed through thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Prior to SDM implementation, participants had a range of attitudes from skeptical to receptive. Those with more direct long-term contact with patients (such as nurses) were more positive about the need for SDM. We identified four main factors that influenced SDM implementation success: raising awareness of SDM behaviors among clinicians through concrete measurements, supporting the formation of new habits through reinforcement mechanisms, increasing the flexibility of PDA delivery, and strong leadership. According to our participants, these factors were instrumental in overcoming initial skepticism and solidifying new SDM behaviors. Improvements to the clinical process were reported. Sustaining and transferring the knowledge gained to other contexts will require adapting measurement tools.

CONCLUSIONS

Applying SDM in clinical practice represents a major shift in mindset for clinicians. Designing SDM initiatives with an understanding of the underlying behavioral mechanisms may increase the probability of successful and sustained implementation.

Teaching Shared Decision Making to Undergraduate Medical Students

Despite the wide endorsement of shared decision making (SDM), its integration into clinical practice has been slow. In this paper, we suggest that this integration may be promoted by teaching SDM not only to residents and practicing physicians, but also to undergraduate medical students. The proposed teaching approach assumes that SDM requires effective doctor-patient communication; that such communication requires empathy; and that the doctor's empathy requires an ability to identify the patient's concerns. Therefore, we suggest shifting the focus of teaching SDM from how to convey health-related information to patients, to how to gain an insight into their concerns. In addition, we suggest subdividing SDM training into smaller, sequentially taught units, in order to help learners to elucidate the patient's preferred role in decisions about her/his care, match the patient's preferred involvement in these decisions, present choices, discuss uncertainty, and encourage patients to obtain a second opinion.

Relative contribution of vitamin D deficiency to subclinical atherosclerosis in Indian context: Preliminary findings

Asian Indians have a genetic predisposition to atherothrombotic risk. common carotid intima-media thickness (CCIMT) measured by ultrasound is a quantitative marker for atherosclerotic burden and a derived variable, that is, "CCIMT statistical Z-score (Z-score)" is useful for better quantification. The association between vitamin D deficiency and atherosclerosis is inconclusive. Since, vitamin D deficiency is highly prevalent in India, there is a need to study its relative contribution to subclinical atherosclerotic burden.This prospective cross-sectional study (n = 117) in apparently healthy individuals aged 20 to 60 years sought to identify the determinants of CCIMT Z score with CCIMT measured by "echo-tracking" method. A multivariable linear regression analysis was done with CCIMT Z score as dependent variable and the following as independent variables: age, body mass index, waist-to-height ratio, total cholesterol to HDL ratio (TC-HDL ratio), serum vitamin D3 levels (ng/mL), sex, diabetes mellitus, current cigarette smoking status. A diagnostic prediction model was also developed with a threshold value of 1.96 for CCIMT Z score.The mean (SD) for calendar age (y) was 40 (8). There were 26 (22.22%) individuals in sample with CCIMT Z score ≥1.96 (advanced stage) of whom 14 (23.33%) were <40 y (n = 60). The mean score was 1.28 (90th percentile) in the entire sample. Vitamin D3 deficiency with a mean (SD) blood level (ng/mL) of 14.3 (6.4) was noted and prevalence of deficiency was 81%. The final model wasCCIMT Z-score = 0.80 +  (0.841 × current smoking = 1) + (0.156 × TC-HDL ratio) - (0.0263 × vitamin D3 blood level in ng/mL).The decreasing order of association is smoking, TC-HDL ratio, and vitamin D3. With the model, likelihood ratio (95% CIs) was better for positive test 3.5 (1.23-9.94) than that for a negative test 0.83 (0.66-1.02).Internal validation with Bootstrap resampling revealed stability of baseline diagnostic variables.There is substantial subclinical atherosclerotic burden in Indian setting with independent contribution by vitamin D deficiency. The model is valuable in "ruling-in" of the underlying advanced atherosclerosis. The study is limited by convenient sampling and lack of external validation of the model.

Efficacy of an Online Curriculum for Perioperative Goals of Care and Code Status Discussions: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Preoperative goals of care (GOC) and code status (CS) discussions are important in achieving an in-depth understanding of the patient's care goals in the setting of a serious illness, enabling the clinician to ensure patient autonomy and shared decision making. Past studies have shown that anesthesiologists are not formally trained in leading these discussions and may lack the necessary skill set. We created an innovative online video curriculum designed to teach these skills. This curriculum was compared to a traditional method of learning from reading the medical literature.

METHODS

In this bi-institutional randomized controlled trial at 2 major academic medical centers, 60 anesthesiology trainees were randomized to receive the educational content in 1 of 2 formats: (1) the novel video curriculum (video group) or (2) journal articles (reading group). Thirty residents were assigned to the experimental video curriculum group, and 30 were assigned to the reading group. The content incorporated into the 2 formats focused on general preoperative evaluation of patients and communication strategies pertaining to GOC and CS discussions. Residents in both groups underwent a pre- and postintervention objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) with standardized patients. Both OSCEs were scored using the same 24-point rubric. Score changes between the 2 OSCEs were examined using linear regression, and interrater reliability was assessed using weighted Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

Residents receiving the video curriculum performed significantly better overall on the OSCE encounter, with a mean score of 4.19 compared to 3.79 in the reading group. The video curriculum group also demonstrated statistically significant increased scores on 8 of 24 rubric categories when compared to the reading group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our novel video curriculum led to significant increases in resident performance during simulated GOC discussions and modest increases during CS discussions. Further development and refinement of this curriculum are warranted.

Outcome of Spinal Versus General Anesthesia in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Spinal anesthesia has been previously shown to offer improved patient outcomes compared with general anesthesia in revision total knee arthroplasty. This study aimed to evaluate the potential differences in perioperartive and postoperative outcomes in revision total hip arthroplasty (THA) between spinal or general anesthesia.

METHODS

A total of 2,656 consecutive patients who underwent revision THA were evaluated. Propensity-score-adjusted multivariate logistic regression analyses were applied to control for intergroup variability and evaluate the differences in outcomes and complications with anesthesia type.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching resulted in 1:1 matching with 265 patients in each anesthesia cohort. Multivariate analyses demonstrated that patients administered general anesthesia had a significantly longer procedure time (174.8 versus 161.3, P < 0.01), higher intraoperative (402.6 versus 305.5 mL, P < 0.01), and total perioperative blood loss (1802.2 versus 1,684.2 mL,P < 0.01). In addition, patients administered general anesthesia were found to have higher odds for two or more inhospital complications (odds ratio, 4.51, P < 0.01) and extended length of stay (odds ratio, 2.45, P = 0.02).

DISCUSSION

Our study shows that propensity-matched patients who received spinal anesthesia for revision THA exhibited notable reduction in surgical time, perioperative blood loss, and complications compared with patients who received general anesthesia, suggesting that spinal anesthesia is a viable alternative to general anesthesia in revision THA.

Regional anaesthesia in patients with diabetes

Diabetes is the most common metabolic condition worldwide and about 20% of surgical patients will have this condition. It is a major risk-factor for worse outcomes after surgery including mortality; infective and non-infective complications; and increased length of stay. However, diabetes is a modifiable risk-factor, and programs to improve medical management have the potential to reduce peri-operative complications and the risk of harm. Regional anaesthesia has well-documented benefits in promoting the restoration of function but there are legitimate concerns that the incidence of complications of regional anaesthesia in patients with diabetes is higher. The aim of this review is to explore in detail the various potential advantages and disadvantages of regional anaesthesia in patients with diabetes. This, in turn, will allow practitioners to undertake more informed shared decision-making and potentially modify their anaesthetic technique for patients with diabetes.

Perioperative shared decision-making in the Bay of Plenty, New Zealand: Audit results from a complex decision pathway quality improvement initiative using a structured communication tool

Patients presenting for elective surgery in the Bay of Plenty area in New Zealand are increasingly elderly with significant medical comorbidities. For these patients the risk-benefit balance of undergoing surgery can be complex. We recognised the need for a robust shared decision-making pathway within our perioperative medicine service. We describe the setup of a complex decision pathway within our district health board and report on the audit data from our first 49 patients. The complex decision pathway encourages surgeons to identify high-risk patients who will benefit from shared decision-making, manages input from multiple specialists as needed with excellent communication between those specialists, and provides a patient-centred approach to decision-making using a structured communication tool.

Clinical negligence

Clinical negligence may be tried under the civil or criminal legal system. Any General Medical Council proceedings are conducted separately. All cost time and money, and may be stressful for the patient and clinicians involved. In order to prove negligence, the claimant must prove the clinician had a duty of care, there was breach of that duty, and that breach caused injury. Interpretation of the law evolves as cases are heard in court and precedents are set. It is important for clinicians to keep up to date with developments in their specialty and good medical practice guidelines.

Informed Consent for Academic Surgeons: A Curriculum-Based Update

INTRODUCTION

The principles of consent are evolving but remain an important part of the surgeon-patient relationship. The goal of this course was a concise, contemporary review of the principles of informed consent that would be favorably received by academic surgeons.

METHODS

The curriculum consisted of ethicohistorical and legal principles, current requirements, and new consent developments. An anonymous, voluntary evaluation tool was used to assess strengths and opportunities for improvement. A short postcourse quiz was developed to assess understanding.

RESULTS

Eighty-five percent of the surgery department faculty participated. Evaluations were overwhelmingly positive, all elements having weighted averages of greater than 4.5 on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). Furthermore, a majority of respondents for the posttest got the answers correct for all five questions asked on the postcourse quiz.

DISCUSSION

A proper understanding of informed consent remains critically important in the practice of surgery. This short course updating surgeons on informed consent quantitatively confirms the favorable reception of this approach in terms of attendance and satisfaction, as well as understanding of the material.

Shared decision making and consent post-Montgomery, UK Supreme Court judgement supporting best practice

The UK Supreme Court Montgomery judgement marks a decisive shift in the legal test of duty of care in the context of consent to treatment from the perspective of the clinician (as represented by Bolam rules) to that of the patient. This has important implications in the surgical field worldwide, where informed consent is critical. This paper aims to explain the ruling and how it impacts the consent process. The case and ruling are outlined and summarised as pertaining to consent and requirements for validity; a shift from the clinician's interpretation about what would be best for patients to the values of the particular patient concerned in the decision in question. A sample of recent commentaries is reviewed. Four examples illustrate some of the practical applications of the Montgomery ruling on consent and how the ruling can empower doctors and patients to make mutually beneficial shared decisions. Future consent should be obtained using a Montgomery compliant strategy in accordance with the principles of shared decision making.

Understanding decision making about major surgery: protocol for a qualitative study of shared decision making by high-risk patients and their clinical teams

INTRODUCTION

Surgical treatments are being offered to more patients than ever before, and increasingly to high-risk patients (typically multimorbid and over 75). Shared decision making is seen as essential practice. However, little is currently known about what 'good' shared decision making involves nor how it applies in the context of surgery for high-risk patients. This new study aims to identify how high-risk patients, their families and clinical teams negotiate decision making for major surgery.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Focusing on major joint replacement, colorectal and cardiac surgery, we use qualitative methods to explore how patients, their families and clinicians negotiate decision making (including interactional, communicative and informational aspects and the extent to which these are perceived as shared) and reflect back on the decisions they made. Phase 1 involves video recording 15 decision making encounters about major surgery between patients, their carers/families and clinicians; followed by up to 90 interviews (with the same patient, carer and clinician participants) immediately after a decision has been made and again 3-6 months later. Phase 2 involves focus groups with a wider group of (up to 90) patients and (up to 30) clinicians to test out emerging findings and inform development of shared decision making scenarios (3-5 summary descriptions of how decisions are made).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study forms the first part in a 6-year programme of research, Optimising Shared decision-makIng for high-RIsk major Surgery (OSIRIS). Ethical challenges around involving patients at a challenging time in their lives will be overseen by the programme steering committee, which includes strong patient representation and a lay chair. In addition to academic outputs, we will produce a typology of decision making scenarios for major surgery to feed back to patients, professionals and service providers and inform subsequent work in the OSIRIS programme.

Patients' concerns and perceptions of anesthesia-associated risks at University Hospital: A cross-sectional study

Background/Aim:

The expectation of undergoing general anesthesia triggers fear in many individuals, and such anxiety can even exceed anxiety about surgery. The only opportunity patients usually have to express their concerns and ask questions is during a preoperative visits to their anesthesiologist. Therefore, a good anesthesiologist-patient relationship is important to reduce patients' anxiety. Achieving this end requires information on patients' attitudes and concerns regarding anesthesia. This study aimed to assess patients' knowledge, attitudes, and concerns about preoperative assessment and fear associated with anesthesia at University Hospital, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Methods:

This cross-sectional study used a self-administered questionnaire distributed to 399 outpatients. Data were collected on patient's characteristics, perceptions about anesthesiologists, preferences for anesthetic management, and preoperative concerns regarding anesthesia.

Results:

Most patients thought that anesthesiologists spent only 3 years in medical school and 2 years in a residency program. Survey participants had several misconceptions about anesthesiologists' role, but it did not affect ratings of their importance. Although, the confidence of patients in anesthesiologists was high, it was significantly lower than their confidence in surgeons. The most common concern expressed by the patients was based on whether anesthesiologists had sufficient experience and qualifications.

Conclusions:

Discussing anesthetic forms preoperatively can help decrease patients' anxiety. More efforts should be made preoperatively to address patients' high level of fear about rare side effects and discuss common side effects they tend to ignore. Preoperative preparation must allow the anesthesiologists enough time to reassure patients about their concerns, as they obtain patients' informed consent.

Informed consent for invasive procedures in the emergency department

BACKGROUND

Informed consent for procedures in the emergency department (ED) challenges practitioners to navigate complex ethical and medical ambiguities. A patient's altered mental status or emergent medical problem does not negate the importance of his or her participation in the decision-making process but, rather, necessitates a nuanced assessment of the situation to determine the appropriate level of participation. Given the complexities involved with informed consent for procedures in the ED, it is important to understand the experience of key stakeholders involved.

METHODS

For this review, we searched Medline, the Cochrane database, and Clinicaltrials.gov for studies involving informed consent in the ED. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were designed to select for studies that included issues related to informed consent as primary outcomes. The following data was extracted from included studies: Title, authors, date of publication, study type, participant type (i.e. adult patient, pediatric patient, parent of pediatric patient, patient's family, or healthcare provider), number of participants, and primary outcomes measured.

RESULTS

Fifteen articles were included for final review. Commonly addressed themes included medical education (7 of 15 studies), surrogate decision-making (5 of 15 studies), and patient understanding (4 of 15 studies). The least common theme addressed in the literature was community notification (1 of 15 studies).

CONCLUSIONS

Studies of informed consent for procedures in the ED span many aspects of informed consent. The aim of the present narrative review is to summarize the work that has been done on informed consent for procedures in the ED.

Shared decision making for elective abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery

Decisions on how and when to treat an abdominal aortic aneurysm involve a number of clinicians; interventional radiologists and vascular surgeons assess the technical ability to repair the aneurysm. Patients' fitness and past medical history is assessed to estimate their short- and long-term survival with or without surgery. Most importantly the patients' personal preference for treatment must be identified. Getting a patient to share what matters most to them requires shared decision making.

Surgical safety in radical cystectomy: the anesthetist's point of view-how to make a safe procedure safer

PURPOSE

The aim of this review is to present an anesthesiological overview on surgical safety for radical cystectomy implementing the cornerstones of today's rapidly evolving field of perioperative medicine.

METHODS

This is a narrative review of current perioperative medicine and surgical safety concepts for major surgery in general with special focus on radical cystectomy.

RESULTS

The tendency for perioperative care and surgical safety is to consider it a continuous proactive pathway rather than a single surgical intervention. It starts at indication for surgery and lasts until full functional recovery. Preoperative optimization leads to superior outcome by mobilizing and/or increasing physiological reserve. Multidisciplinary teamwork involving all the relevant parties from the beginning of the pathway is crucial for outcome rather than an isolated specialist approach. This fact has gained importance in times of an ageing frail population and rising health care cost. We also present our 2019 Cystectomy Enhanced Recovery Approach for optimization of perioperative care for open radical cystectomy in a high caseload center.

CONCLUSIONS

With the implementation of in itself simple but crucial steps in perioperative medicine such as multimodal prehabilitation, safety checks, better perioperative monitoring and enhanced recovery concepts, even complex surgical procedures such as radical cystectomy can be performed safer. Emphasis has to be laid on a more global view of the patients' path through the perioperative process than on the surgical procedure alone.

Do we really allow patient decision-making in rotator cuff surgery? A prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND

There is a growing patient interest in being involved in the decision-making process. However, little information is provided on how this information should be structured. Does it make a difference, in patient treatment decision-making, whether information is given based on the benefits or on the side effects in rotator cuff disorders?

METHODS

It is a prospective randomized study that includes patients diagnosed with rotator cuff tears. Patients were randomly allocated to either group A (benefit-inform) or group B (side effect-inform) and were asked to answer the following questions based on their assigned group: Group A: Your doctor informs you that you have a rotator cuff tear and states that if he/she surgically repairs your cuff tear you will improve and that the cuff remains healed at the 2-year follow-up in 71% of the cases where surgery is done. Would you choose surgery? Yes or No Group B: Your doctor informs you that you have a rotator cuff tear and that if he/she surgically repairs your cuff tear you will improve and that the cuff is torn again at 2-year follow-up in 29% of the cases where surgery is done. Would you choose surgery? Yes or No Age, gender, the shoulder affected and the functional status assessed through the Constant score were also recorded.

RESULTS

80 patients were randomized (43 to group A and 37 to group B). The patients assigned to group A (benefit) accepted surgery significantly more frequently than those assigned to group B (complication) (P = 0.000). In group A, 36 of 43 (84%) accepted surgery, compared to 17 of 37 (46%) in group B.

CONCLUSIONS

The way that information on rotator cuff disorders is provided strongly influences patients' treatment decisions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03205852 . Registered 29 June 2017. Retrospectively registered.