Do-Not-Resuscitate status as an independent risk factor for patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture

Current practice and awareness of perioperative do-not-attempt-resuscitation orders: a single-center retrospective survey and complete questionnaire survey

PURPOSE

We investigated whether patients who have been issued a do-not-attempt-resuscitation order (DNAR) preoperatively (hereafter, DNAR patients) are informed of the DNAR code change when they undergo anesthesia. We also conducted a survey of the awareness of medical staff regarding perioperative DNARs, and investigated the current situation at a single-center in Japan.

METHODS

For DNAR patients managed by anesthesiologists from January 2019 to September 2022, we retrospectively investigated whether the patient was informed of the DNAR code change or the DNAR was automatically suspended without explanation. Next, in July 2023, a questionnaire survey on perioperative DNARs was conducted among all medical staff at our center.

RESULTS

Among the 4,164 cases managed by anesthesiologists during the study period, 100 DNAR patients (2.4%) were identified. Of these, 27 patients received an explanation about the DNAR code change before surgery. Multivariate analysis showed that female patients (odds ratio [OR] 5.3, 95% confidence interval [CI] 3.8-6.7; p = 0.023) and patients with low Barthel Index (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.96-0.99; p = 0.010) tended to receive explanations about DNAR code changes. In the questionnaire survey, 25% of the 1,051 respondents answered that DNAR code changes should be explained to patients before surgery.

CONCLUSION

In clinical practice, 27% of DNAR patients were informed of DNARs code change before surgery. Perioperative advance care planning should be further promoted in clinical practice by creating guidelines and training programs regarding perioperative DNARs.

The role of Advance Directives and Living Wills in Anesthesia Practice

Preoperative review of existing advance directives and a discussion of patient goals should be routinely done to address any potential limitations on resuscitative therapies during perioperative care. Both surgeons and anesthesiologists should be collaboratively involved in these discussions, and all perioperative physicians should receive training in shared decision making and goals of care discussions. These discussions should center around patient preferences for limitations on life-sustaining medical therapy, which should be accurately documented and adhered to during the perioperative period. Patients should be informed that limitations of life-sustaining medical therapy may increase their risk of postoperative mortality.

Relationship Between Newly Established Perioperative DNR Status and Perioperative Outcomes in the Elderly Population: A NSQIP Database Analysis

Background: Health care practitioners have developed complex algorithms to numerically calculate surgical risk. We examined the association between the initiation of a new do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status during hospitalization and postoperative outcomes, including mortality. We hypothesized that new DNR status would be associated with similar complication rates, even though mortality rates may be higher. Methods: A retrospective cohort study using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Geriatric Surgery Research File. Two cohorts were defined by the presence of a new DNR status during the hospitalization that was not present on hospital admission. Multivariable logistic regression was used to control for differences between the DNR and non-DNR cohorts. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included rates of postoperative complications, including returning to the operating room, reintubation, failure to wean from ventilation, surgical site infections, dehiscence, pneumonia, acute kidney injury, renal failure, stroke, cardiac arrest, acute myocardial infarction, transfusion requirements, sepsis, urinary tract infections, venous thromboembolisms, total number of complications for each patient, and hospital length of stay. Results: In our geriatric population with a newly established DNR status, the mortality rate was 39.29%, significantly greater than the non-DNR population after multivariable regression. Secondary outcomes also occurred at an increased rate in the DNR cohort including surgical site infections (8.29% vs 4.04%), pneumonia (18% vs 2.26%), renal insufficiency (2.43% vs 0.35%), acute renal failure (5% vs 0.19%), stroke (3% vs 0.36%), acute myocardial infarction (6.29% vs 0.95%), and cardiac arrest (5.86% vs 0.51%). Conclusions: The initiation of a new DNR status during hospitalization is associated with a significantly higher burden of both morbidity and mortality. This contrasts with prior studies that did not show an increased rate of adverse outcomes and suggests that a new DNR status in postoperative patients may reflect a consequence of adverse postoperative events. The informed consent process in older patients at risk for adverse outcomes after surgery should include discussions regarding goals of care and acceptable risk.

Pre-operative resuscitation discussion with patients undergoing fractured neck of femur repair: a service evaluation and discussion of current standards

INTRODUCTION

The majority of neck of femur (NOF) fracture patients are frail and at a higher risk of cardiac arrest. This makes discussion of treatment escalation vital to informed care. The optimal time for these discussions is prior to admission or trauma. However, when this has not occurred, it is vital that these discussions happen early in the patient's admission when family is often present and before further deterioration in their condition. We undertook a service evaluation to evaluate and discuss the effect of clinician education on improving rates of timely discussion amongst orthopaedic doctors.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The first cycle included 94 patients. Their notes were reviewed for presence of a ReSPECT (Recommend Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment) form prior to operation and whether this it countersigned by a consultant. Following this, clinician education was undertaken and a re-audit was carried out involving 57 patients.

RESULTS

ReSPECT form completion rates rose from 23% in cycle 1-32% in cycle 2 following intervention. The proportion which consultants signed rose from 41% to 56% following intervention.

CONCLUSION

This project demonstrates how a basic education program can prove limited improvements in the rates of timely resuscitation discussions. We discuss a current lack in quality research into educational programs for discussion of treatment escalation for orthopaedic trainees. We suggest there is room to improve national best practice guidelines and training to ensure these discussions are carried out more frequently and to a better standard.

Implementing advance care plans in the peri-operative period, including plans for cardiopulmonary resuscitation: Association of Anaesthetists clinical practice guideline

Contemporary guidance takes a patient-centred approach and recommends discussing and planning treatments that should be considered, not just those that should be withheld. Although some organisations and communities still use specific DNACPR (do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation) forms to recommend that cardiopulmonary resuscitation is not attempted, this approach has been shown to have disadvantages and is no longer regarded as best practice. The following guidelines have been produced in response to this change. They are designed to help anaesthetists, as part of the wider healthcare team, to implement and respond to advance care planning documents before and during procedures. The guidelines apply to all procedures, however minor and low risk they are considered to be, and the same ethical and legal principles apply to procedures carried out under local or regional anaesthesia and/or conscious sedation, as well as to those under general anaesthesia.

The Role of Anesthesiologists in Perioperative Limitation of Potentially Life-Sustaining Medical Treatments: A Narrative Review and Perspective

No patient arrives at the hospital to undergo general anesthesia for its own sake. Anesthesiology is a symbiont specialty, with the primary mission of preventing physical and psychological pain, easing anxiety, and shepherding physiologic homeostasis so that other care may safely progress. For most elective surgeries, the patient-anesthesiologist relationship begins shortly before and ends after the immediate perioperative period. While this may tempt anesthesiologists to defer goals of care discussions to our surgical or primary care colleagues, we have both an ethical and a practical imperative to share this responsibility. Since the early 1990s, the American College of Surgeons (ACS), the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), and the Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses (AORN) have mandated a "required reconsideration" of do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders. Key ethical considerations and guiding principles informing this "required reconsideration" have been extensively discussed in the literature and include respect for patient autonomy, beneficence, and nonmaleficence. In this article, we address how well these principles and guidelines are translated into daily clinical practice and how often anesthesiologists actually discuss goals of care or potential limitations to life-sustaining medical treatments (LSMTs) before administering anesthesia or sedation. Having done so, we review how often providers implement goal-concordant care, that is, care that reflects and adheres to the stated patient wishes. We conclude with describing several key gaps in the literature on goal-concordance of perioperative care for patients with limitations on LSMT and summarize novel strategies and promising efforts described in recent literature to improve goal-concordance of perioperative care.

The Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) order in the perioperative setting: practical considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Addressing patients' Do Not Resuscitate (DNR) status in the perioperative setting is important for shared patient decision-making. Although the inherently resuscitative nature of anesthesia and surgery may pose an ethical quandary for clinicians tasked with caring for the patient, anesthesiologist-led efforts need to evaluate all aspects of the DNR order and operative procedures.

RECENT FINDINGS

Approximately 15% of patients undergoing surgical procedures have a preexisting DNR order (Margolis et al., 1995) [1]. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) and the American College of Surgeons (ACS) do not support automatic reversal of the DNR order in the perioperative setting. Citing patient self-determination and autonomy, these societies advocate for a thoughtful discussion where a patient or legal designee may make an informed decision regarding resuscitation in the perioperative setting. Although studies have suggested increased perioperative mortality among patients with a preexisting DNR order, this data remains largely inconclusive.

SUMMARY

Efforts must be made to address the DNR order in the perioperative setting. The fundamental tenets of medical ethics, nonmaleficence, beneficence, and patient autonomy can help to guide this oftentimes challenging discussion.

Variation in Patient-Reported Advance Care Preferences in the Preoperative Setting

BACKGROUND

High-quality shared decision-making for patients undergoing elective surgical procedures includes eliciting patient goals and treatment preferences. This is particularly important, should complications occur and life-sustaining therapies be considered. Our objective was to determine the preoperative care preferences of older higher-risk patients undergoing elective procedures and to determine any factors associated with a preference for limitations to life-sustaining treatments.

METHODS

Cross-sectional survey conducted between May and December 2018. Patients ≥55 years of age presenting for a preprocedural evaluation in a high-risk anesthesia clinic were queried on their desire for life-sustaining treatments (cardiopulmonary resuscitation, mechanical ventilation, dialysis, and artificial nutrition) as well as tolerance for declines in health states (physical disability, cognitive disability, and daily severe pain).

RESULTS

One hundred patients completed the survey. The median patient age was 68. Most patients were Caucasian (87%) and had an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score of III (88%). The majority of patients (89%) desired cardiopulmonary resuscitation. However, most patients would not accept mechanical ventilation, dialysis, or artificial nutrition for an indefinite period of time. Similarly, most patients (67%-81%) indicated they would not desire treatments to sustain life in the event of permanent physical disability, cognitive disability, or daily severe pain.

CONCLUSIONS

Among older, higher-risk patients presenting for elective procedures, most patients chose limitations to life-sustaining treatments. This work highlights the need for an in-depth goals of care discussion and establishment of advance care preferences before a procedure or operative intervention.

Do-Not-Resuscitate status is an independent risk factor for medical complications and mortality among geriatric patients sustaining hip fractures

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes after hip fracture surgery between DNR/DNI and full code cohorts to determine whether DNR/DNI status is an independent predictor of complications and mortality within one year. A significant number of geriatric hip fracture patients carry a code status designation of DNR/DNI (Do-Not-Resuscitate/Do-Not-Intubate). There is limited data addressing how this designation may influence prognosis.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of all geriatric hip fractures treated between 2002 and 2017 at a single level-I academic trauma center was performed. 434 patients were eligible for this study with 209 in the DNR/DNI cohort and 225 in the full code cohort. The independent variable was code-status and dependent variables included patient demographics, surgery performed, American Society of Anesthesiologists, score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, significant medical and surgical complications within one year of surgery, duration of follow-up by an orthopaedic surgeon, duration of follow-up by any physician, and mortality within 1 year of surgery. One-year complication rates were compared, and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to analyze the relationship between independent and dependent variables.

RESULTS

The DNR/DNI cohort experienced significantly more surgical complications compared to the full code cohort (14.8% vs 7.6%, p = 0.024). There was a significantly higher rate of medical complications and mortality in the DNR/DNI cohort (57.9% vs 36%, p < 0.001 and 19.1% vs 3.1%, p = 0.037, respectively). In the regression analysis, DNR/DNI status was an independent predictor of a medical complication (odds ratio 2.33, p = 0.004) and one-year mortality (odds ratio 9.69, p < 0.001), but was not for a surgical complication (OR 1.95, p = 0.892).

CONCLUSIONS

In our analysis, DNR/DNI code status was an independent risk factor for postoperative medical complications and mortality within one year following hip fracture surgery. The results of our study highlight the need to recognize the relationship between DNR/DNI designation and medical frailty when treating hip fractures in the elderly population.

Medical Comanagement of Hip Fracture Patients Is Not Associated with Superior Perioperative Outcomes: A Propensity Score-Matched Retrospective Cohort Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Project

BACKGROUND

Medical comanagement entails a significant commitment of clinical resources with the aim of improving perioperative outcomes for patients admitted with hip fractures. To our knowledge, no national analyses have demonstrated whether patients benefit from this practice.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort analysis of the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) targeted user file for hip fracture 2016-2017. Medical comanagement is a dedicated variable in the NSQIP. Propensity score matching was performed to control for baseline differences associated with comanagement. Matched pairs binary logistic regression was then performed to determine the effect of comanagement on the following primary outcomes: mortality and a composite endpoint of major morbidity.

RESULTS

Unadjusted analyses demonstrated that patients receiving medical comanagement were older and sicker with a greater burden of comorbidities. Comanagement did not have a higher proportion of patients participating in a standardized hip fracture program (53.6% vs 53.7%; P > .05). Comanagement was associated with a higher unadjusted rate of mortality (6.9% vs 4.0%, odds ratio [OR] 1.79: 1.44-2.22; P < .0001) and morbidity (19.5% vs 9.6%, OR 2.28: 1.98-2.63; P < .0001). After propensity score matching was used to control for baseline differences associated with comanagement, patients in the comanagement cohort continued to demonstrate inferior mortality (OR 1.36: 1.02-1.81; P = .033) and morbidity (OR 1.82: 1.52-2.20; P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis does not provide evidence that dedicated medical comanagement of hip fracture patients is associated with superior perioperative outcomes. Further efforts may be needed to refine opportunities to modify the significant morbidity and mortality that persists in this population.

Cognitive impairment assessment and interventions to optimize surgical patient outcomes

For elderly patients undergoing elective surgical procedures, preoperative evaluation of cognition is often overlooked. Patients may experience postoperative delirium (POD) and postoperative cognitive decline (POCD), especially those with certain risk factors, including advanced age. Preoperative cognitive impairment is a leading risk factor for both POD and POCD, and studies have noted that identifying these deficiencies is critical during the preoperative period so that appropriate preventive strategies can be implemented. Comprehensive geriatric assessment is a useful approach which evaluates a patient's medical, psycho-social, and functional domains objectively. Various screening tools are available for preoperatively identifying patients with cognitive impairment. The Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols have been discussed in the context of prehabilitation as an effort to optimize a patient's physical status prior to surgery and decrease the risk of POD and POCD. Evidence-based protocols are warranted to standardize care in efforts to effectively meet the needs of these patients.

Creating a Pathway for Multidisciplinary Shared Decision-Making to Improve Communication During Preoperative Assessment

Shared decision-making (SDM) is essential for high-quality surgical care. Barriers to SDM exist in clinical practice but there is evidence these obstacles can be overcome. SDM requires clinician and patient engagement. Though patients may indicate understanding, deficits in decision making may persist based on language, age, or educational barriers. Multidisciplinary decision-making before surgery is an opportunity for anesthesiologists and other perioperative professionals to improve surgical care. The authors present an example of a successfully implemented pathway for high-risk surgical patients at a tertiary care center, leveraging the preoperative anesthesia evaluation.