Perioperative medicine: Overview

Abstract
Purpose: Diversion of controlled substances in the perioperative setting is an ongoing challenge, with consequences for patients, anesthesiologists, perioperative staff, and health care facilities alike. Perioperative environments are at high risk for diversion, since controlled substances are frequently handled in these settings, with varying levels of oversight. In this narrative review, we summarize strategies for preventing diversion of controlled substances in perioperative settings (i.e., operating rooms, endoscopy suites, and postanesthesia recovery units).

Source: We performed a targeted literature search in PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, the Cochrane Register of Controlled trials, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, as well as a manual search for additional references. We used terminology related to drug diversion, drug abuse, anesthesiologists, pharmacists, physicians, operating room personnel, and controlled substances.

Principal findings: Many strategies have been described for preventing diversion in perioperative settings, and these are broadly categorized into: education, distribution, auditing, or provider screening. Some of these approaches may be time- and resource-intensive. There is limited evidence to inform anesthesia departments' choice of which strategies to adopt.

Conclusion: Although awareness of perioperative controlled substance diversion has been improving, there are too few data to suggest an optimal approach. Anesthesia departments will need to work collaboratively with hospital pharmacies and actively select strategies that are reasonable given local resources.

Abstract in English
Purpose: Preoperative exercise could improve postoperative outcomes for people with frailty; however, little is known about how to predict older people's adherence to exercise before surgery (i.e., prehabilitation) programs. Our objective was to derive and validate a model to predict prehabilitation adherence in older adults living with frailty before cancer surgery.

Methods: This was a nested prospective cohort study of older adults with frailty having cancer surgery who participated in a randomized controlled trial of home-based prehabilitation compared with standard perioperative care. We constructed a multivariable ordinary least squares linear regression model to predict adherence. Covariates were selected a priori based on clinical expertise and systematic review. Optimism was estimated through internal validation using bootstrap resampling.

Results: The derivation cohort consisted of 95 participants in the intervention arm of the trial. Percent adherence ranged from 0% to 100%, with a mean (standard deviation) of 61 (34)%. Previous physical activity and age were the only predictors significant at the 5% level.

Conclusion: A prespecified multivariable model may help to explain a modest degree of variation in prehabilitation adherence in older people with frailty. While this model is an important step toward personalizing prehabilitation support, this study was limited by a small sample size and future research is needed to better understand personalized prediction of prehabilitation adherence in older people with frailty.

Abstract
Purpose: We sought to evaluate 1) patient- and anesthesiologist-reported rates of postoperative delirium (POD) risk discussion during preoperative meetings, 2) patients' and anesthesiologists' ratings of the importance of POD, and 3) predictors of patient-reported discussion of POD risk during preoperative meetings.

Methods: In this multicentre two-part cross-sectional survey study, patients ≥ 65 yr scheduled to undergo elective noncardiac surgery completed a five-minute survey after preoperative anesthesia consultation. Patients were asked about their perception of POD importance, and whether they discussed or were assessed for POD risk. Anesthesiologists were surveyed using self-administered surveys circulated via institutional email lists. Anesthesiologists were asked about the frequency of POD risk assessment and discussion in older adults, tools used, and perception of POD-screening barriers.

Results: Four hundred and twelve (of 510 approached) patients (50% male; mean age, 73 yr) and 267 anesthesiologists (of 1,205 invited via e-mail) participated in this study conducted in five Canadian hospitals. Postoperative delirium screening and discussion was reported by 88/412 (22%) patients and 229/267 (86%) anesthesiologists. Postoperative delirium was rated as "somewhat-extremely" important by 64% of patients. A previous history of delirium, higher education, the number of daily medications, and longer surgical duration were associated with POD discussion. On average, anesthesiologists rated the importance of POD at 8/10, and 42% ranked "patient risk factors" as the top reason prompting discussion.

Conclusion: The combined evaluation of patients' and anesthesiologists' perspectives provides valuable information on preoperative POD screening and risk assessment, and highlights areas for improvement in the current practice. Most factors we identified to be associated with higher odds of POD discussion are recognized risk factors of POD.