5 research outputs found
Post-anaesthesia pulmonary complications after use of muscle relaxants (POPULAR) : a multicentre, prospective observational study
No full textBackground: Results from retrospective studies suggest that use of neuromuscular blocking agents during general anaesthesia might be linked to postoperative pulmonary complications. We therefore aimed to assess whether the use of neuromuscular blocking agents is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods: We did a multicentre, prospective observational cohort study. Patients were recruited from 211 hospitals in 28 European countries. We included patients (aged ≥18 years) who received general anaesthesia for any in-hospital procedure except cardiac surgery. Patient characteristics, surgical and anaesthetic details, and chart review at discharge were prospectively collected over 2 weeks. Additionally, each patient underwent postoperative physical examination within 3 days of surgery to check for adverse pulmonary events. The study outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications from the end of surgery up to postoperative day 28. Logistic regression analyses were adjusted for surgical factors and patients' preoperative physical status, providing adjusted odds ratios (ORadj) and adjusted absolute risk reduction (ARRadj). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01865513. Findings: Between June 16, 2014, and April 29, 2015, data from 22 803 patients were collected. The use of neuromuscular blocking agents was associated with an increased incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients who had undergone general anaesthesia (1658 [7·6%] of 21 694); ORadj 1·86, 95% CI 1·53–2·26; ARRadj −4·4%, 95% CI −5·5 to −3·2). Only 2·3% of high-risk surgical patients and those with adverse respiratory profiles were anaesthetised without neuromuscular blocking agents. The use of neuromuscular monitoring (ORadj 1·31, 95% CI 1·15–1·49; ARRadj −2·6%, 95% CI −3·9 to −1·4) and the administration of reversal agents (1·23, 1·07–1·41; −1·9%, −3·2 to −0·7) were not associated with a decreased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Neither the choice of sugammadex instead of neostigmine for reversal (ORadj 1·03, 95% CI 0·85–1·25; ARRadj −0·3%, 95% CI −2·4 to 1·5) nor extubation at a train-of-four ratio of 0·9 or more (1·03, 0·82–1·31; −0·4%, −3·5 to 2·2) was associated with better pulmonary outcomes. Interpretation: We showed that the use of neuromuscular blocking drugs in general anaesthesia is associated with an increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Anaesthetists must balance the potential benefits of neuromuscular blockade against the increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Funding: European Society of Anaesthesiology
Post-anaesthesia pulmonary complications after use of muscle relaxants (POPULAR): a multicentre, prospective observational study
No full textBackground Results from retrospective studies suggest that use of neuromuscular blocking agents during general anaesthesia might be linked to postoperative pulmonary complications. We therefore aimed to assess whether the use of neuromuscular blocking agents is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications.Methods We did a multicentre, prospective observational cohort study. Patients were recruited from 211 hospitals in 28 European countries. We included patients (aged >= 18 years) who received general anaesthesia for any in-hospital procedure except cardiac surgery. Patient characteristics, surgical and anaesthetic details, and chart review at discharge were prospectively collected over 2 weeks. Additionally, each patient underwent postoperative physical examination within 3 days of surgery to check for adverse pulmonary events. The study outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications from the end of surgery up to postoperative day 28. Logistic regression analyses were adjusted for surgical factors and patients' preoperative physical status, providing adjusted odds ratios (ORadj) and adjusted absolute risk reduction (ARR(adj)). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials. gov, number NCT01865513.Findings Between June 16, 2014, and April 29, 2015, data from 22 803 patients were collected. The use of neuromuscular blocking agents was associated with an increased incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients who had undergone general anaesthesia (1658 [7.6%] of 21 694); ORadj 1.86, 95% CI 1.53-2.26; ARR(adj) -4.4%, 95% CI -5.5 to -3.2). Only 2.3% of high-risk surgical patients and those with adverse respiratory profiles were anaesthetised without neuromuscular blocking agents. The use of neuromuscular monitoring (ORadj 1.31, 95% CI 1.15-1.49; ARR(adj) -2.6%, 95% CI -3.9 to -1.4) and the administration of reversal agents (1.23, 1.07-1.41; -1.9%, -3.2 to -0.7) were not associated with a decreased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Neither the choice of sugammadex instead of neostigmine for reversal (ORadj 1.03, 95% CI 0.85-1 center dot 25; ARR(adj) -0.3%, 95% CI -2.4 to 1.5) nor extubation at a train-of-four ratio of 0.9 or more (1.03, 0.82-1.31; -0.4%, -3.5 to 2.2) was associated with better pulmonary outcomes.Interpretation We showed that the use of neuromuscular blocking drugs in general anaesthesia is associated with an increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Anaesthetists must balance the potential benefits of neuromuscular blockade against the increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications
Post-anaesthesia pulmonary complications after use of muscle relaxants (POPULAR): A multicentre, prospective observational study
No full textBackground: Results from retrospective studies suggest that use of neuromuscular blocking agents during general anaesthesia might be linked to postoperative pulmonary complications. We therefore aimed to assess whether the use of neuromuscular blocking agents is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Methods: We did a multicentre, prospective observational cohort study. Patients were recruited from 211 hospitals in 28 European countries. We included patients (aged ≥18 years) who received general anaesthesia for any in-hospital procedure except cardiac surgery. Patient characteristics, surgical and anaesthetic details, and chart review at discharge were prospectively collected over 2 weeks. Additionally, each patient underwent postoperative physical examination within 3 days of surgery to check for adverse pulmonary events. The study outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications from the end of surgery up to postoperative day 28. Logistic regression analyses were adjusted for surgical factors and patients' preoperative physical status, providing adjusted odds ratios (ORadj) and adjusted absolute risk reduction (ARRadj). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01865513. Findings: Between June 16, 2014, and April 29, 2015, data from 22 803 patients were collected. The use of neuromuscular blocking agents was associated with an increased incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications in patients who had undergone general anaesthesia (1658 [7·6%] of 21 694); ORadj 1·86, 95% CI 1·53–2·26; ARRadj −4·4%, 95% CI −5·5 to −3·2). Only 2·3% of high-risk surgical patients and those with adverse respiratory profiles were anaesthetised without neuromuscular blocking agents. The use of neuromuscular monitoring (ORadj 1·31, 95% CI 1·15–1·49; ARRadj −2·6%, 95% CI −3·9 to −1·4) and the administration of reversal agents (1·23, 1·07–1·41; −1·9%, −3·2 to −0·7) were not associated with a decreased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Neither the choice of sugammadex instead of neostigmine for reversal (ORadj 1·03, 95% CI 0·85–1·25; ARRadj −0·3%, 95% CI −2·4 to 1·5) nor extubation at a train-of-four ratio of 0·9 or more (1·03, 0·82–1·31; −0·4%, −3·5 to 2·2) was associated with better pulmonary outcomes. Interpretation: We showed that the use of neuromuscular blocking drugs in general anaesthesia is associated with an increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Anaesthetists must balance the potential benefits of neuromuscular blockade against the increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Funding: European Society of Anaesthesiology
Improving care at scale: process evaluation of a multi-component quality improvement intervention to reduce mortality after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH trial).
No full textBACKGROUND: Improving the quality and safety of perioperative care is a global priority. The Enhanced Peri-Operative Care for High-risk patients (EPOCH) trial was a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial of a quality improvement (QI) programme to improve 90-day survival for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery in 93 hospitals in the UK National Health Service. METHODS: The aim of this process evaluation is to describe how the EPOCH intervention was planned, delivered and received, at both cluster and local hospital levels. The QI programme comprised of two interventions: a care pathway and a QI intervention to aid pathway implementation, focussed on stakeholder engagement, QI teamwork, data analysis and feedback and applying the model for improvement. Face-to-face training and online resources were provided to support senior clinicians in each hospital (QI leads) to lead improvement. For this evaluation, we collated programme activity data, administered an exit questionnaire to QI leads and collected ethnographic data in six hospitals. Qualitative data were analysed with thematic or comparative analysis; quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The EPOCH trial did not demonstrate any improvement in survival or length of hospital stay. Whilst the QI programme was delivered as planned at the cluster level, self-assessed intervention fidelity at the hospital level was variable. Seventy-seven of 93 hospitals responded to the exit questionnaire (60 from a single QI lead response on behalf of the team); 33 respondents described following the QI intervention closely (35%) and there were only 11 of 37 care pathway processes that > 50% of respondents reported attempting to improve. Analysis of qualitative data suggests QI leads were often attempting to deliver the intervention in challenging contexts: the social aspects of change such as engaging colleagues were identified as important but often difficult and clinicians frequently attempted to lead change with limited time or organisational resources. CONCLUSIONS: Significant organisational challenges faced by QI leads shaped their choice of pathway components to focus on and implementation approaches taken. Adaptation causing loss of intervention fidelity was therefore due to rational choices made by those implementing change within constrained contexts. Future large-scale QI programmes will need to focus on dedicating local time and resources to improvement as well as on training to develop QI capabilities. EPOCH TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN80682973 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN80682973 Registered 27 February 2014 and Lancet protocol 13PRT/7655
Effectiveness of a national quality improvement programme to improve survival after emergency abdominal surgery (EPOCH): a stepped-wedge cluster-randomised trial
No full textBackgroundEmergency abdominal surgery is associated with poor patient outcomes. We studied the effectiveness of a national quality improvement (QI) programme to implement a care pathway to improve survival for these patients.MethodsStepped-wedge cluster randomised trial of patients aged ≥40 years undergoing emergency open major abdominal surgery. Hospitals were organised into 15 geographical clusters and commenced the QI programme in random order, based on a computer generated random sequence, over an 85-week period. The trial included an ethnographic study in six hospitals. The primary outcome measure was mortality within 90 days of surgery. Analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. The primary outcome was analysed using a mixed-effects parametric survival model, adjusting for time-related effects.FindingsOf 15,873 eligible patients from 93 NHS hospitals, primary outcome data were analysed for 8482 patients in the usual care group and 7374 in the QI group. The primary outcome occurred in 1393 patients in the usual care group (16%) compared with 1210 patients in the QI group (16%) (HR QI vs usual care: 1.11 [0.96-1.28]). There were only modest overall improvements in processes of patient care following QI implementation. The ethnographic study revealed good QI engagement but limited time and resources to implement change, affecting which processes teams addressed, the rate of change and eventual success.InterpretationThere was no survival benefit from a QI programme to implement a care pathway for patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery. The success of the QI intervention may have been limited by the time and resources needed to improve patient care.FundingNational Institute for Health Research, Health Services and Delivery Research
