Critical care usage after major gastrointestinal and liver surgery: a prospective, multicentre observational study

BACKGROUND

Patient selection for critical care admission must balance patient safety with optimal resource allocation. This study aimed to determine the relationship between critical care admission, and postoperative mortality after abdominal surgery.

METHODS

This prespecified secondary analysis of a multicentre, prospective, observational study included consecutive patients enrolled in the DISCOVER study from UK and Republic of Ireland undergoing major gastrointestinal and liver surgery between October and December 2014. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore associations between critical care admission (planned and unplanned) and mortality, and inter-centre variation in critical care admission after emergency laparotomy.

RESULTS

Of 4529 patients included, 37.8% (n=1713) underwent planned critical care admissions from theatre. Some 3.1% (n=86/2816) admitted to ward-level care subsequently underwent unplanned critical care admission. Overall 30-day mortality was 2.9% (n=133/4519), and the risk-adjusted association between 30-day mortality and critical care admission was higher in unplanned [odds ratio (OR): 8.65, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.51-19.97) than planned admissions (OR: 2.32, 95% CI: 1.43-3.85). Some 26.7% of patients (n=1210/4529) underwent emergency laparotomies. After adjustment, 49.3% (95% CI: 46.8-51.9%, P<0.001) were predicted to have planned critical care admissions, with 7% (n=10/145) of centres outside the 95% CI.

CONCLUSIONS

After risk adjustment, no 30-day survival benefit was identified for either planned or unplanned postoperative admissions to critical care within this cohort. This likely represents appropriate admission of the highest-risk patients. Planned admissions in selected, intermediate-risk patients may present a strategy to mitigate the risk of unplanned admission. Substantial inter-centre variation exists in planned critical care admissions after emergency laparotomies.

Using judgement analysis to identify dietitians' referral prioritisation for assessment in adult acute services

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Dietitians need to prioritise referrals in order to manage their work load. Novice dietitians may not receive training on prioritisation and could be helped with an evidence-based, effective decision-making training tool. To develop such a tool, it is necessary to understand how experts make prioritisation decisions. This study aimed to model expert decision-making policy for prioritising dietetic referrals in adult acute-care services.

METHODS/SUBJECTS

Social judgement theory was used to model expert decision-making policy. Informational cues and cue levels were identified. A set of case scenarios that replicated dietetic referrals in adult acute services were developed using fractional factorial design approach. Experienced dietitians were asked to make prioritisation decisions on case scenarios. A model was derived using multiple regression analysis to elicit the weighting given to cues and cue levels by the experts when making prioritisation decisions.

RESULTS

Six cues and 21 cue levels were identified, and 60 unique case scenarios were created. Fifty experienced dietitians made decisions on these case scenarios. The 'reason for referral' and 'biochemistry picture' were the two most influential cues, and 'weight history' was the least significant. 'Nutritional status', 'presenting complaint' and 'previous food intake' had similar weightings. In all, 95.7% of the variability in the experts' average judgement (adjusted R2=0.93) was predicted by the 6 cues.

CONCLUSIONS

A model for referral prioritisation in adult acute services described experienced dietitians' decision-making policy. This can be used to develop training materials that may increase the effectiveness and quality of prioritisation judgements.European Journal of Clinical Nutrition advance online publication, 23 August 2017; doi:10.1038/ejcn.2017.123.

Factors affecting outcome after surgery for intracranial aneurysm in Glasgow

Two-hundred and ninety-five patients with angiographically demonstrated intracranial aneurysms presented to the Institute of Neurological Sciences, Glasgow over a 3-year period (1986-88). We have reviewed this group to assess the effect of changing patterns of management upon outcome. The overall mortality rate was 9.4%, and the surgical mortality rate was 4% in this selected series. Factors significantly associated with a poor outcome were: WFNS grades III-V on admission, presence of a haematoma on the first CT scan, delayed ischaemic deficit, and development of a post-operative haematoma. Seventy-six per cent of the patients who developed a delayed ischaemic deficit (nearly a third of those with recent subarachnoid haemorrhage) made a good recovery, in contrast to previous studies, and over two-thirds of those accepted in grades IV and V (28 patients) made a good recovery after surgery. Active management of patients in grades IV and V, and those with delayed ischaemia, together with prophylactic Nimodipine therapy and selective early surgery, offers the best prospect for further improvement in outcome after aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage.