Establishing a perioperative medicine for older people undergoing surgery service for general surgical patients at a district general hospital

Development of a minimum clinical dataset for preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment using a modified Delphi technique

OBJECTIVE

To construct a standardised, consensus-guided minimum clinical dataset (MCDS) for preoperative comprehensive geriatric assessment and optimisation (CGA) in Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand.

METHODS

We conducted a review of the international perioperative literature to identify CGA domains and tools for potential inclusion in the MCDS. We invited members of the Australian and New Zealand Society for Geriatric Medicine to participate in a Delphi study to obtain consensus on MCDS tools. Participants were asked to rate proposed tools using Likert scales (when >2 tools) or make a binary choice between two proposed tools. Consensus was considered to be achieved when there was at least 75% concordance between the two rounds amongst the participants, and at least one variable attaining over 50% of participants' votes. Domains that did not achieve consensus in Round 1 were carried over to Round 2.

RESULTS

There were 73 participants in Round 1 of the Delphi study and 47 participants in Round 2. Consensus was achieved on tool/s recommended for every MCDS domain: Clinical Frailty Scale (frailty); sMMSE, RUDAS, MoCA (cognition); 4AT (delirium); timed-up-and-go (physical function); GDS-15 (mood); Barthel Index (functional status); and MUST (malnutrition).

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend clinicians delivering preoperative CGA consider the use of the MCDS we have constructed when assessing older people contemplating surgery, as part of a multicomponent and multidisciplinary approach to optimising perioperative outcomes.

The implementation of a perioperative medicine for older people undergoing surgery service: a qualitative case study

BACKGROUND

The international scale and spread of evidence-based perioperative medicine for older people undergoing surgery (POPS) services has not yet been fully realised. Implementation science provides a structured approach to understanding factors that act as barriers and facilitators to the implementation of POPS services. In this study, we aimed to identify factors that influence the implementation of POPS services in the UK.

METHODS

A qualitative case study at three UK health services was undertaken. The health services differed across contextual factors (population, workforce, size) and stages of POPS service implementation maturity. Semi-structured interviews with purposively sampled clinicians (perioperative medical, nursing, allied health, and pharmacy) and managers (n = 56) were conducted. Data were inductively coded, then thematically analysed using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

Fourteen factors across all five CFIR domains were relevant to the implementation of POPS services. Key shared facilitators included stakeholders understanding the rationale of the POPS service, with support from their networks, POPS champions, and POPS clinical leads. We found substantial variation and flexibility in the way that health services responded to these shared facilitators and this was relevant to the implementation of POPS services.

CONCLUSIONS

Health services planning to implement a POPS service should use health service-specific strategies to respond flexibly to local factors that are acting as barriers or facilitators to implementation. To support implementation of a POPS service, we recommend health services prioritise understanding local networks, identifying POPS champions, and ensuring that stakeholders understand the rationale for the POPS service. Our study also provides a structure for future research to understand the factors associated with 'unsuccessful' implementation of a POPS service, which can inform ongoing efforts to implement evidence-based perioperative models of care for older people.

Developing the workforce to deliver perioperative medicine for older people undergoing surgery: a transdisciplinary education programme

Patients who are older, frail and medically complex are increasingly presenting for elective and emergency surgical interventions. Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) and optimisation methodology improve morbidity and mortality in older surgical patients. However, there is a need to develop an extended and flexible workforce to provide patient-centred quality perioperative care and to simultaneously tackle the growing backlog of planned surgery following the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. At Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust, Perioperative Medicine for Older People (POPS) delivers a transdisciplinary education programme for foundation doctors, specialty registrars and advanced clinical practitioners to develop a blended team with shared capabilities and goals in perioperative care. This case study outlines the framework of how the education programme was developed and its evaluation, and the ongoing work of POPS to disseminate knowledge and promote national innovation and collaboration.

Surgical outcome improvement by shared decision-making: value of a preoperative multidisciplinary target clinic for the elderly in colorectal surgery

PURPOSE

Frailty and comorbidities increase the risk of postoperative complications and raise treatment costs. Perioperative optimisation is shown to improve surgical outcomes for the elderly. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of introducing a multidisciplinary preoperative clinic for older patients (Colchester Older Persons' Evaluation for Surgery (COPES) clinic) undergoing major colorectal surgery.

METHODS

This 5-year single centre study included patients >65 years with ≥3 comorbidities undergoing major colorectal surgery. From October 2018, patients with these characteristics were evaluated and optimised in the COPES clinic by a geriatrician and an anaesthetist. Outcomes were compared to high-risk patients operated on prior to COPES (pre-COPES group). The primary outcomes were postoperative morbidity at discharge and 6 months measured by the Comprehensive Complication Index. Patients were matched on age and number of comorbidities.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients were enrolled in the pre-COPES and 18 in the COPES group. After matching, the results were comparable for both groups. The length of stay was shorter in the COPES group and the recurrence rate was higher; however, it did not reach statistical significance in both findings.

CONCLUSION

This clinic intends to improve treatment quality, placing emphasis on shared decision-making. More focus should be put on patient-reported outcomes and experiences. Especially for elderly patients, quality of life and maintaining independence are often their priority. To determine the true value of a preoperative multidisciplinary clinic targeting elderly comorbid patients, a prospective study with larger cohort is needed, focusing not only on objective outcomes but also on patient-reported outcomes.

A Description of Interventions Prompted by Preoperative Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment and Optimization in Older Elective Noncardiac Surgical Patients

OBJECTIVES

Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA), a multicomponent, complex intervention, can be used to improve perioperative outcomes. This study aimed to describe the actions and interventions prompted by preoperative CGA and optimization in elective noncardiac, older, surgical patients.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

Five hundred consecutive patients aged over 65 years attending a preoperative CGA and optimization clinic in a single academic center.

METHODS

A retrospective review of electronic clinical records was undertaken. CGA prompted actions and interventions were categorized a priori and examined according to the perioperative pathway and frailty status.

RESULTS

Patients received a median of nine interventions (IQR 6‒12, range 0‒28). Long-term condition medication changes were made in 375 (75.0%) patients, lifestyle advice provided in 269 (53.8%), therapy interventions delivered in 117 (23.4%), shared decision making documented in 495 (99.0%) with individualized admission plans documented in 410/426 (96.2%). Following CGA, 74/500 (14.8%) patients did not undergo surgery and were more likely to have benign pathology (69% vs 53%, P = .01), higher frailty scores (Edmonton Frail Scale 8 (IQR 5‒10) vs 4 (IQR 2-6), P < .001), lower functional status (Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living 33 (IQR 16‒47) vs 57 (IQR 45‒64), P < .001) or cognitive scores (Montreal Cognitive Assessment 19 (IQR 14‒24) vs 24 (IQR 20‒26), P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

This study provides a description of actions and interventions prompted by preoperative CGA at one center. Such a detailed exploration of the CGA process and the clinical skills necessary to deliver it, should be used to inform future multicenter studies and the development and implementation of perioperative services for older patients.