This study aimed to study one-month recovery profile and to identify predictors of Quality of Recovery (QOR) after painful day surgery and investigate the influence of pain therapy on QOR.
This is a ...secondary analysis of a single-centre, randomised controlled trial of 200 patients undergoing ambulatory haemorrhoid surgery, arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery, or inguinal hernia repair between January 2016 and March 2017. Primary endpoints were one-month recovery profile and prevalence of poor/good QOR measured by the Functional Recovery Index (FRI), the Global Surgical Recovery index and the EuroQol questionnaire at postoperative day (POD) 1 to 4, 7, 14 and 28. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors of QOR at POD 7, 14, and 28. Differences in QOR between pain treatment groups were analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test.
Four weeks after haemorrhoid surgery, inguinal hernia repair, arthroscopic knee and arthroscopic shoulder surgery, good QOR was present in 71%, 76%, 57% and 24% respectively. Poor QOR was present in 5%, 0%, 7% and 29%, respectively. At POD 7 and POD 28, predictors for poor/intermediate QOR were type of surgery and a high postoperative pain level at POD 4. Male gender was another predictor at POD 7. Female gender and having a paid job were also predictors at POD 28. Type of surgery and long term fear of surgery were predictors at POD 14. No significant differences in total FRI scores were found between the two different pain treatment groups.
The present study shows a procedure-specific variation in recovery profile in the 4-week period after painful day surgery. The best predictors for short-term (POD 7) and long-term (POD 28) poor/intermediate QOR were a high postoperative pain level at POD 4 and type of surgery. Different pain treatment regimens did not result in differences in recovery profile.
European Union Clinical Trials Register 2015-003987-35.
OBJECTIVETo compare outcomes after endovascular treatment (EVT) for acute ischemic stroke with 3 different types of anesthetic management in clinical practice, as anesthetic management may influence ...functional outcome.
METHODSData of patients with an anterior circulation occlusion, included in the Dutch nationwide, prospective Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial of Endovascular Treatment for Acute Ischemic Stroke in the Netherlands (MR CLEAN) Registry between March 2014 and June 2016, were analyzed. Patients were divided into 3 groups defined by anesthetic technique performed during EVTlocal anesthesia only (LA), general anesthesia (GA), or conscious sedation (CS). Primary outcome was the modified Rankin Scale score at 90 days. To compare functional outcome between groups, we estimated a common odds ratio (OR) with ordinal logistic regression, adjusted for age, sex, prestroke modified Rankin Scale score, baseline NIH Stroke Scale score, collaterals, and time from onset to arrival at intervention center.
RESULTSA total of 1,376 patients were included. Performed anesthetic technique was LA in 821 (60%), GA in 381 (28%), and CS in 174 (13%) patients. Compared to LA, both GA and CS were associated with worse functional outcome on the modified Rankin Scale score at 90 days (GA cORadj 0.75; 95% confidence interval CI 0.58–0.97; CS cORadj 0.45; 95% CI 0.33–0.62). CS was associated with worse functional outcome than GA (cORadj 0.60; 95% CI 0.42–0.87).
CONCLUSIONSLA is associated with better functional outcome than systemic sedation in patients undergoing EVT for acute ischemic stroke. Whereas LA had a clear advantage over CS, this was less prominent compared to GA.
CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCEThis study provides Class III evidence that for patients with acute ischemic stroke undergoing EVT, LA improves functional outcome compared to GA or CS.
Standardized risk assessment tools can be used to identify patients at higher risk for postoperative complications and death. In this study, we validate the PreOperative Score to predict ...Post-Operative Mortality (POSPOM) for in-hospital mortality in a large cohort of non-cardiac surgery patients. In addition, the performance of POSPOM to predict postoperative complications was studied.
Data from the control cohort of the TRACE (routine posTsuRgical Anesthesia visit to improve patient outComE) study was analysed. POSPOM scores for each patient were calculated post-hoc. Observed in-hospital mortality was compared with predicted mortality according to POSPOM. Discrimination was assessed by receiver operating characteristic curves with C-statistics for in-hospital mortality and postoperative complications. To describe the performance of POSPOM sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive values, and positive predictive values were calculated. For in-hospital mortality, calibration was assessed by a calibration plot.
In 2490 patients, the observed in-hospital mortality was 0.5%, compared to 1.3% as predicted by POSPOM. 27.1% of patients had at least one postoperative complication of which 22.4% had a major complication. For in-hospital mortality, POSPOM showed strong discrimination with a C-statistic of 0.86 (95% CI, 0.78-0.93). For the prediction of complications, the discrimination was poor to fair depending on the severity of the complication. The calibration plot showed poor calibration of POSPOM with an overestimation of in-hospital mortality.
Despite the strong discriminatory performance, POSPOM showed poor calibration with an overestimation of in-hospital mortality. Performance of POSPOM for the prediction of any postoperative complication was poor but improved according to severity.
To investigate healthcare system-driven variation in general characteristics, interventions, and outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients admitted to the ICU within one Western ...European region across three countries.
Multicenter observational cohort study.
Seven ICUs in the Euregio Meuse-Rhine, one region across Belgium, The Netherlands, and Germany.
Consecutive COVID-19 patients supported in the ICU during the first pandemic wave.
None.
Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics, laboratory values, and outcome data were retrieved after ethical approval and data-sharing agreements. Descriptive statistics were performed to investigate country-related practice variation. From March 2, 2020, to August 12, 2020, 551 patients were admitted. Mean age was 65.4 ± 11.2 years, and 29% were female. At admission, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores were 15.0 ± 5.5, 16.8 ± 5.5, and 15.8 ± 5.3 (p = 0.002), and Sequential Organ Failure Assessment scores were 4.4 ± 2.7, 7.4 ± 2.2, and 7.7 ± 3.2 (p < 0.001) in the Belgian, Dutch, and German parts of Euregio, respectively. The ICU mortality rate was 22%, 42%, and 44%, respectively (p < 0.001). Large differences were observed in the frequency of organ support, antimicrobial/inflammatory therapy application, and ICU capacity. Mixed-multivariable logistic regression analyses showed that differences in ICU mortality were independent of age, sex, disease severity, comorbidities, support strategies, therapies, and complications.
COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs within one region, the Euregio Meuse-Rhine, differed significantly in general characteristics, applied interventions, and outcomes despite presumed genetic and socioeconomic background, admission diagnosis, access to international literature, and data collection are similar. Variances in healthcare systems' organization, particularly ICU capacity and admission criteria, combined with a rapidly spreading pandemic might be important drivers for the observed differences. Heterogeneity between patient groups but also healthcare systems should be presumed to interfere with outcomes in coronavirus disease 2019.
BACKGROUNDNSAIDs and paracetamol are the cornerstones of pain treatment after day case surgery. However, NSAIDs have numerous contraindications and consequently are not suitable in up to 25% of ...patients. Metamizole is a non-opioid compound with a favourable gastro-intestinal and cardiovascular profile compared with NSAIDs.
OBJECTIVESThe study aimed to assess if a combination of metamizole and paracetamol is noninferior to a combination of ibuprofen and paracetamol in treating pain at home after painful day case surgery.
DESIGNA double-blind randomised controlled trial.
SETTINGSingle centre.
PATIENTSTwo hundred patients undergoing elective ambulatory haemorrhoid surgery, arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery, or inguinal hernia repair.
INTERVENTIONPatients were randomly allocated to receive either metamizole and paracetamol (n = 100) or ibuprofen and paracetamol (n = 100) orally for four days.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURESAverage postoperative pain intensity using a numerical rating scale and use of rescue medication were measured in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU) and on postoperative days (POD) 1 to 3. A difference in mean numerical rating scale score of 1 point or less was considered noninferior. Adverse effects of study medication and satisfaction with study medication were measured on PODs 1 to 3 by telephone follow-up.
RESULTSIn the PACU, the difference in mean ± SD pain score between metamizole and paracetamol and ibuprofen and paracetamol was 0.85 ± 0.78. From POD 1 to 3, this difference was lower than 1, resulting in noninferiority. Rescue opioid consumption in the PACU and on PODs 1 and 3 was not significantly different between treatment groups. Rescue opioid consumption on POD2 was significantly higher in the ibuprofen and paracetamol group (P = 0.042). Adverse effects of study medication and overall patient satisfaction were similar in both groups.
CONCLUSIONParacetamol/metamizole and paracetamol/ibuprofen are equally effective in treatment of acute postoperative pain at home after ambulatory surgery with comparable patient satisfaction levels.
TRIAL REGISTRATIONEuropean Union Clinical Trials Register 2015-003987-35.
OBJECTIVES:In 2009, Gramke et al have described predictive factors to pre-operatively detect those at risk for moderate to severe acute postoperative pain (APSP) after day surgery. The aim of the ...present study is to externally validate this initial model and to improve and internally validate a modified version of this model.
METHODS:Elective patients scheduled for day surgery were prospectively enrolled from November 2008 to April 2010. Model discrimination was quantified using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). Model calibration was assessed by visual inspection of the calibration plot. Subsequently, we modified (different assignment of type of surgery, different cut-off for moderate to severe APSP, continuous of dichotomized variables and testing of additional variables) and internally validated this model by standard bootstrapping techniques.
RESULTS:A total of 1118 patients were included. The AUC for the original model was 0.81 in the derivation dataset and 0.72 in our validation dataset. The model showed poorly calibrated risk predictions. The AUC of the modified model was 0.82 (optimism-corrected AUC=0.78). This modified model showed good calibration.
CONCLUSION:The original prediction model of Gramke et al performed insufficient on our cohort of outpatients with respect to discrimination and calibration. Internal validation of a modified model shows promising results. In this model, preoperative pain, patient derived expected pain and different types of surgery are the strongest predictors of moderate to severe APSP after day surgery.This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0.
All European countries need to increase the number of health professionals in the near future. Most efforts have not brought the expected results so far. The current notion is that this is mainly ...related to the fact that female physicians will clearly outnumber their male colleagues within a few years in nearly all European countries. Still, women are underrepresented in leadership and research positions throughout Europe.
The MedGoFem project addresses multiple perspectives with the participation of multiple stakeholders. The goal is to facilitate the implementation of Gender Equality Plans (GEP) in university hospitals; thereby, transforming the working conditions for women working as researchers and highly qualified physicians simultaneously. Our proposed innovation, a crosscutting topic in all research and clinical activities, must become an essential part of university hospital strategic concepts.
We capture the current status with gender-sensitive demographic data concerning medical staff and conduct Web-based surveys to identify cultural, country-specific, and interdisciplinary factors conducive to women's academic success. Individual expectations of employees regarding job satisfaction and working conditions will be visualized based on "personal construct theory" through repertory grids. An expert board working out scenarios and a gender topic agenda will identify culture-, nation-, and discipline-specific aspects of gender equality. University hospitals in 7 countries will establish consensus groups, which work on related topics. Hospital management supports the consensus groups, valuates group results, and shares discussion results and suggested measures across groups. Central findings of the consensus groups will be prepared as exemplary case studies for academic teaching on research and work organization, leadership, and management.
A discussion group on gender equality in academic medicine will be established on an internationally renowned open-research platform. Project results will be published in peer-reviewed journals with high-impact factors. In addition, workshops on gender dimension in research using the principles of Gendered Innovation will be held. Support and consulting services for hospitals will be introduced in order to develop a European consulting service.
The main impact of the project will be the implementation of innovative GEP tailored to the needs of university hospitals, which will lead to measurable institutional change in gender equality. This will impact the research at university hospitals in general, and will improve career prospects of female researchers in particular. Simultaneously, the gender dimension in medical research as an innovation factor and mandatory topic will be strengthened and integrated in each individual university hospital research activity. Research funding organizations can use the built knowledge to include mandatory topics for funding applications to enforce the use and implementation of GEP in university hospitals.
Traditionally, major complications and unanticipated admission/readmission rates were used to assess outcome after day surgery. However, in view of the relative absence of major complications the ...quality of recovery (QOR) should be considered one of the principal endpoints after day surgery. In our study, the level of QOR is defined by a combination of the Global Surgical Recovery (GSR) Index and the Quality of Life (QOL). The aim of this study was to analyze prevalence and predictors of QOR after day surgery on the fourth postoperative day. Elective patients scheduled for day surgery from November 2008 to April 2010 were enrolled in a prospective cohort study. Outcome parameters were measured by using questionnaire packages at 2 time points: 1 week preoperatively and 4 days postoperatively. Primary outcome parameter is the QOR and is defined as good if the GSR index >80% as well as the postoperative QOL is unchanged or improved as compared with baseline. QOR is defined as poor if both the GSR index ≤ 80% and if the postoperative QOL is decreased as compared with baseline. QOR is defined as intermediate in all other cases. Three logistic regression analyses were performed to determine predictors for poor QOR after day surgery. A total of 1118 patients were included. A good QOR was noted in 17.3% of patients, an intermediate QOR in 34.8%, and a poor QOR in 47.8% 4 days after day surgery. The best predictor for poor QOR after day surgery was type of surgery. Other predictors were younger age, work status, and longer duration of surgery. A history of previous surgery, expected pain (by the patient) and high long-term surgical fear were significant predictors of poor QOR in only 1 of 3 prediction models. The QOR at home 4 days after day surgery was poor in the majority of patients and showed a significant procedure-specific variation. Patients at risk for poor QOR can be identified during the preoperative period based on type of surgery, age, work status, and the duration of the surgery.
PDF
