Perioperative medicine training resources: U5M1: Management of postoperative conditions

Abstract
Background: Multimorbidity, defined as the coexistence of two or more chronic conditions in the same individual, is becoming a crucial health issue in primary care. Patients with multimorbidity utilize health care at a higher rate and have higher mortality rates and poorer quality of life compared to patients with single diseases.

Aims: To explore evidence on how to advance multimorbidity management, with a focus on primary care. Primary care is where a large number of patients with multimorbidity are managed and is considered to be a gatekeeper in many health systems.

Methods: A narrative review was conducted using four major electronic databases consisting of PubMed, Cochrane, World Health Organization database, and Google scholar. In the first round of reviews, priority was given to review papers summarizing the current issues and challenges in the management of multimorbidity. Thematic analysis using an inductive approach was used to build a framework on how to advance management. The second round of review focused on original articles providing evidence within the primary care context.

Results: The review found that advancing multimorbidity management in primary care requires a health system approach and a patient-centered approach. The health systems approach includes three major areas: (i) improves access to care, (ii) promotes generalism, and (iii) provides a decision support system. For the patient-centered approach, four key aspects are essential for multimorbidity management: (i) promoting doctor-patient relationship, (ii) prioritizing health problems and sharing decision-making, (iii) supporting self-management, and (iv) integrating care.Advancement of multimorbidity management in primary care requires integrating concepts of multimorbidity management guidelines with concepts of patient-centered and chronic care models. This simple integration provides an overarching framework for advancing the health care system, connecting the processes of individualized care plans, and integrating care with other providers, family members, and the community.

Abstract
Background: Despite the clear benefits of palliative care, surgical patients are less likely to receive palliative care consultations when compared to their medical counterparts. In this context, we conducted semi-structured interviews with a diverse range of practicing surgeons to better understand surgeon attitudes and experiences with both palliative care approaches and specialty services.

Methods: Forty-six surgeons from community, tertiary-care, and academic institutions across the state of Michigan agreed to participate in this study. Each participant's interview lasted between 30 and 60 minutes and was digitally recorded. Audiotapes were transcribed verbatim and de-identified for names and places. The data were analyzed through iterative steps informed by thematic analysis.

Results: Six major themes emerged describing surgeon-reported barriers to palliative care approaches and use of palliative care services, which were observed at the surgeon-level, patient and family-level, and system-level. At the surgeon-level, the following three major themes emerged: surgeon knowledge and attitudes, prognostication challenges, and surgeon identity. At the patient and family-level, two major themes were identified: expectations and discordance. At the system-level, two major themes emerged: culture and resources.

Conclusions: Among our cohort of surgeons, several key factors influenced their use of palliative approaches and specialty palliative care services. A better understanding of surgeon-perceived barriers may lead to future work aimed at creating meaningful, surgeon-specific interventions that address the underuse of this important care for surgical patients and patients being considered for surgery.

Abstract
Abstract: To determine the validity of the Australian clinical prediction tool Criteria for Screening and Triaging to Appropriate aLternative care (CRISTAL) based on objective clinical criteria to accurately identify risk of death within 3 months of admission among older patients.

Methods: Prospective study of ≥ 65 year-olds presenting at emergency departments in five Australian (Aus) and four Danish (DK) hospitals. Logistic regression analysis was used to model factors for death prediction; Sensitivity, specificity, area under the ROC curve and calibration with bootstrapping techniques were used to describe predictive accuracy.

Results: 2493 patients, with median age 78-80 years (DK-Aus). The deceased had significantly higher mean CriSTAL with Australian mean of 8.1 (95% CI 7.7-8.6 vs. 5.8 95% CI 5.6-5.9) and Danish mean 7.1 (95% CI 6.6-7.5 vs. 5.5 95% CI 5.4-5.6). The model with Fried Frailty score was optimal for the Australian cohort but prediction with the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) was also good (AUROC 0.825 and 0.81, respectively). Values for the Danish cohort were AUROC 0.764 with Fried and 0.794 using CFS. The most significant independent predictors of short-term death in both cohorts were advanced malignancy, frailty, male gender and advanced age. CriSTAL's accuracy was only modest for in-hospital death prediction in either setting.

Conclusions: The modified CriSTAL tool (with CFS instead of Fried's frailty instrument) has good discriminant power to improve prognostic certainty of short-term mortality for ED physicians in both health systems. This shows promise in enhancing clinician's confidence in initiating earlier end-of-life discussions.

Abstract
Objective: To develop a screening tool to identify elderly patients at the end of life and quantify the risk of death in hospital or soon after discharge for to minimise prognostic uncertainty and avoid potentially harmful and futile treatments.

Design: Narrative literature review of definitions, tools and measurements that could be combined into a screening tool based on routinely available or obtainable data at the point of care to identify elderly patients who are unavoidably dying at the time of admission or at risk of dying during hospitalisation.

Main measurements: Variables and thresholds proposed for the Criteria for Screening and Triaging to Appropriate aLternative care (CriSTAL screening tool) were adopted from existing scales and published research findings showing association with either in-hospital, 30-day or 3-month mortality.

Results: Eighteen predictor instruments and their variants were examined. The final items for the new CriSTAL screening tool included: age ≥65; meeting ≥2 deterioration criteria; an index of frailty with ≥2 criteria; early warning score >4; presence of ≥1 selected comorbidities; nursing home placement; evidence of cognitive impairment; prior emergency hospitalisation or intensive care unit readmission in the past year; abnormal ECG; and proteinuria.

Conclusions: An unambiguous checklist may assist clinicians in reducing uncertainty patients who are likely to die within the next 3 months and help initiate transparent conversations with families and patients about end-of-life care. Retrospective chart review and prospective validation will be undertaken to optimise the number of prognostic items for easy administration and enhanced generalisability. Development of an evidence-based tool for defining and identifying the dying patient in hospital: CriSTAL.

Abstract
Aims of the study: Multimorbidity is a growing global health problem, resulting in an increased perioperative risk for surgical patients. Data on both the prevalence of multimorbidity and its impact on perioperative outcome are limited. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification uses only the single most severe systemic disease to define the ASA class and ignores multimorbidity. This study aimed to assess the number and type of all anaesthesia-relevant comorbidities and to analyse their impact on outcome and hospital costs.

Methods: This cohort study is nested in the ClassIntra® validation study and includes only patients enrolled at the University Hospital of Basel. Approximately 30 patients per surgical discipline undergoing any type of in-hospital surgery were followed up until hospital discharge to record all intra- and postoperative adverse events. In addition, the type and severity of all perioperatively relevant comorbidities were extracted from the electronic medical record according to a predefined list. The primary endpoint was the number of all anaesthesia-relevant comorbidities by ASA class. Using structural equation models, the direct and indirect effects of comorbidities on costs were estimated after adjustment for the ASA class and further relevant confounders and mediators.

Results: Of 320 enrolled patients, 27 were ASA I (8%), 150 ASA II (47%), 116 ASA III (36%) and 27 ASA IV (8%). The median number of comorbidities per patient was 5 (range 0-18), this number significantly increasing with higher ASA class: 1 comorbidity (95% CI 0.0-2.0) in ASA I, 4 comorbidities (3.8-4.2) in ASA II, 9 (8.1-9.9) in ASA III and 12 (10-14) in ASA IV patients. Independent of ASA class, each additional comorbidity increased hospital costs by EUR 1,198 (95% CI 288-2108) with almost identical proportions of direct and indirect effects. The number of anaesthesia-relevant comorbidities also increased postoperative complications and postoperative length of hospital stay.

Conclusions: Multimorbidity in perioperative patients is highly prevalent and has a relevant impact on hospital costs, independent of the ASA class. Incorporating multimorbidity into the ASA classification might be warranted to improve its predictive ability and support adequate reimbursement.

Abstract
This essay is a personal commentary on general aspects of quality assessment that are either illustrated or challenged by the articles presented in this volume. It is not a critique of the individual papers in the collection; papers are mentioned in order to illustrate or clarify a point, without implication of either merit or demerit. This article addresses the definitions of quality, the relationship of cost to quality, approaches to assessing quality, the use of case fatality as an indicator of quality, measures of post-hospital morbidity, case-mix adjustment, sources of information, selection of referents, criteria and standards, quality assurance, the role of consumers, the prevalence of quality, the effects of prospective payment, and a research agenda.

Abstract
Background: The surprise question - "Would I be surprised if this patient died in the next 12 months?" - has been used to identify patients at high risk of death who might benefit from palliative care services. Our objective was to systematically review the performance characteristics of the surprise question in predicting death.

Methods: We searched multiple electronic databases from inception to 2016 to identify studies that prospectively screened patients with the surprise question and reported on death at 6 to 18 months. We constructed models of hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristics (sROCs) to determine prognostic performance.

Results: Sixteen studies (17 cohorts, 11 621 patients) met the selection criteria. For the outcome of death at 6 to 18 months, the pooled prognostic characteristics were sensitivity 67.0% (95% confidence interval [CI] 55.7%-76.7%), specificity 80.2% (73.3%-85.6%), positive likelihood ratio 3.4 (95% CI 2.8-4.1), negative likelihood ratio 0.41 (95% CI 0.32-0.54), positive predictive value 37.1% (95% CI 30.2%-44.6%) and negative predictive value 93.1% (95% CI 91.0%-94.8%). The surprise question had worse discrimination in patients with noncancer illness (area under sROC curve 0.77 [95% CI 0.73-0.81]) than in patients with cancer (area under sROC curve 0.83 [95% CI 0.79-0.87; p = 0.02 for difference]). Most studies had a moderate to high risk of bias, often because they had a low or unknown participation rate or had missing data.

Interpretation: The surprise question performs poorly to modestly as a predictive tool for death, with worse performance in noncancer illness. Further studies are needed to develop accurate tools to identify patients with palliative care needs and to assess the surprise question for this purpose.

Abstract
Objective: To quantify the prevalence of hospital-acquired complications; to determine the relative influence of patient- and hospital-related factors on complication rates.

Design, participants: Retrospective analysis of administrative data (Integrated South Australian Activity Collection; Victorian Admitted Episodes Dataset) for multiple-day acute care episodes for adults in public hospitals.

Setting: Thirty-eight major public hospitals in South Australia and Victoria, 2015-2018.

Main outcome measures: Hospital-acquired complication rates, overall and by complication class, by hospital and hospital type (tertiary referral, major metropolitan service, major regional service); variance in rates (intra-class correlation coefficient, ICC) at the patient, hospital, and hospital type levels as surrogate measures of their influence on rates.

Results: Of 1 558 978 public hospital episodes (10 029 918 bed-days), 151 486 included a total of 214 286 hospital-acquired complications (9.72 [95% CI, 9.67-9.77] events per 100 episodes; 2.14 [95% CI, 2.13-2.15] events per 100 bed-days). Complication rates were highest in tertiary referral hospitals (12.7 [95% CI, 12.6-12.8] events per 100 episodes) and for episodes including intensive care components (37.1 [95% CI, 36.7-37.4] events per 100 episodes). For all complication classes, inter-hospital variation was determined more by patient factors (overall ICC, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.53-0.57) than by hospital factors (ICC, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02-0.07) or hospital type (ICC, 0.01; 95% CI, 0.001-0.03).

Conclusions: Hospital-acquired complications were recorded for 9.7% of hospital episodes, but patient-related factors played a greater role in determining their prevalence than the treating hospital.

Abstract
Importance: The need for integrating palliative care into surgical services has been established within the surgical literature. The ability to effectively screen, obtain an appropriately timed consultation, and determine the effect of consultation remains problematic.

Objective: To examine surgical palliative care consultations over time and their relationship to the initiation and implementation of a systemwide frailty-screening program.

Design, setting, and participants: We reviewed all surgical palliative care consultations performed between January 1, 2006, and August 31, 2013, and abstracted the referring service (medicine/surgery), date of surgery (if any), date of death (if any), and all variables required to calculate a frailty score using the risk analysis index. We examined changes in mortality and referral patterns before and after implementation of the frailty-screening program using multivariable logistic regression.

Exposures: Surgical palliative care consultations, including frailty screening.

Main outcomes and measures: The primary study outcomes were 30-, 180-, and 360-day mortality.

Results: From 2006 to 2013, a total of 310 palliative care consultations were ordered for surgical patients: 160 before initiation of frailty screening (January 1, 2011) and 150 after initiation of the program. The groups had similar demographics, comorbidities, and frailty scores. After initiation, we observed dramatically decreased mortality at 30, 180, and 360 days (21.3% vs 31.9%, 44.0% vs 70.6%, and 66.0% vs 78.8%, respectively; all P < .05). This coincided with an increased rate of palliative care consultations from 32 per year to 56 per year. After initiation of the program, consultations were more likely to be requested by surgeons (56.7% vs 24.4%; P < .05) and were more likely to occur before the index operation (52.0% vs 26.3%; P < .05). Implementation of the screening program was associated with a 33% reduction in 180-day mortality (odds ratio [OR], 0.37; 95% CI, 0.22-0.62; P < .001) even after controlling for age, frailty, and whether the patients had surgery. Modeled mortality was also reduced when the palliative care consultation was ordered by a surgeon (OR, 0.50; CI, 0.30-0.83; P = .007) or ordered before the operation (OR, 0.52; CI, 0.30-0.90; P = .02).

Conclusions and relevance: Our data suggest that a systematic frailty-screening program effectively identifies at-risk surgical patients and is associated with a significant reduction in mortality for patients undergoing palliative care consultation. Analysis also suggests that preoperative palliative care consultations ordered by surgeons are associated with reduced mortality rates.

Abstract
Palliative care (PC) seeks to improve the quality of life for patients facing serious illness. Several oncology organizations have guidelines about PC, reflecting the need to integrate PC into standard oncology care. Many surgical patients do not receive PC despite the need for these services and established surgical PC competencies. Recent educational and research efforts reveal increased appreciation of the need and benefit of integrating PC services with cancer care in general, and surgical care, specifically.

Abstract
Purpose: Despite the growing acceptance of palliative care as a component of high-quality care for patients with serious illness, it remains underutilized in the surgical critical care setting. This article provides insight into a model for palliative care integration into the surgical intensive care unit (SICU), using triggers.

Methods: We performed a prospective cohort study after the implementation of a new set of palliative care triggers in the SICU of an 1170-bed tertiary medical center over the course of 9 months. We aimed to determine the ability of these triggers to identify patients who would benefit from palliative care consultation.

Results: There were 517 SICU admissions during the period of interest. Of this cohort, patients who had not yet been discharged at the time of analysis were excluded (n=25), and the remaining underwent analysis (n=492). Factors significantly associated with hospital death or hospice discharge were repeat SICU admission, metastatic/advanced cancer, SICU physician referral, and the matching of 2 or more secondary criteria.

Conclusions: A series of triggers can help identify patients who may benefit from palliative care consultation. This approach can be used in intensive care settings to facilitate palliative care integration.

Abstract
Background: Postoperative complications are associated with reduced long-term survival. We characterise healthcare use changes after sentinel postoperative complications.

Methods: We linked primary and secondary care records of patients undergoing elective surgery at four East London hospitals (2012-7) with at least 90 days follow-up. Complication codes (wound infection, urinary tract infection, pneumonia, new stroke, and new myocardial infarction) recorded within 90 days of surgery were identified from primary or secondary care. Outcomes were change in healthcare contact days in the 2 yr before and after surgery, and 2 yr mortality. We report rate ratios (RaR) with 95% confidence intervals and adjusted for baseline healthcare use and confounders using negative binomial regression.

Results: We included 49 913 patients (median age 49 yr [inter-quartile range {IQR}: 34-64]), 27 958 (56.0%) were female. Amongst 3883 (7.8%) patients with complications (median age 58 [IQR: 43-72]), there were 18.4 days per year in contact with healthcare before surgery and 25.3 days after surgery (RaR: 1.38 [1.37-1.39]). Patients without complications (median age 48 [IQR: 33-63]) had 12.3 days per year in contact with healthcare before surgery and 14.0 days after surgery (RaR: 1.14 [1.14-1.15]). The adjusted incidence rate ratio of days in contact with healthcare associated with complications was 1.67 (1.49-1.87). More patients (391; 10.1%) with complications died within 2 yr than those without (1428; 3.1%).

Conclusions: Patients with postoperative complications are older with greater healthcare use before surgery. However, their absolute and relative increases in healthcare use after surgery are greater than patients without complications.

Abstract
Background: The average age of the surgical population continues to increase, as does prevalence of long-term diseases. However, outcomes amongst multi-morbid surgical patients are not well described.

Methods: We included adults undergoing non-obstetric surgical procedures in the English National Health Service between January 2010 and December 2015. Patients could be included multiple times in sequential 90-day procedure spells. Multi-morbidity was defined as presence of two or more long-term diseases identified using a modified Charlson comorbidity index. The primary outcome was 90-day postoperative death. Secondary outcomes included emergency hospital readmission within 90 days. We calculated age- and sex-adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using logistic regression. We compared the outcomes associated with different disease combinations.

Results: We identified 20 193 659 procedure spells among 13 062 715 individuals aged 57 (standard deviation 19) yr. Multi-morbidity was present among 2 577 049 (12.8%) spells with 195 965 deaths (7.6%), compared with 17 616 610 (88.2%) spells without multi-morbidity with 163 529 deaths (0.9%). Multi-morbidity was present in 1 902 859/16 946 808 (11.2%) elective spells, with 57 663 deaths (2.7%, OR 4.9 [95% CI: 4.9-4.9]), and 674 190/3 246 851 (20.7%) non-elective spells, with 138 302 deaths (20.5%, OR 3.0 [95% CI: 3.0-3.1]). Emergency readmission followed 547 399 (22.0%) spells with multi-morbidity compared with 1 255 526 (7.2%) without. Multi-morbid patients accounted for 57 663/114 783 (50.2%) deaths after elective spells, and 138 302/244 711 (56.5%) after non-elective spells. The rate of death varied five-fold from lowest to highest risk disease pairs.

Conclusion: One in eight patients undergoing surgery have multi-morbidity, accounting for more than half of all postoperative deaths. Disease interactions amongst multi-morbid patients is an important determinant of patient outcome.

Abstract
Background: Large gaps in the delivery of palliative care services exist in the outpatient setting, where there is a failure to address goals of care and to plan for and treat predictable crises. While not originally considered an ideal environment to deliver palliative care services, the emergency department presents a key decision point at which providers set the course for a patient's subsequent trajectory and goals of care. Many patients with serious and life-threatening illness present to emergency departments because symptoms, such as pain or nausea and vomiting, cannot be controlled at home, in an assisted living facility, or in a provider's office. Even for patients in whom goals of care are clear, families often need support for their loved one's physical as well as mental distress. The emergency department is often the only place that can provide needed interventions (e.g., intravenous fluids or pain medications) as well as immediate access to advanced diagnostic tests (e.g. computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging).

Discussion: Palliative care services provide relief of burdensome symptoms, attention to spiritual and social concerns, goal setting, and patient-provider communication that are often not addressed in the acute care setting. While emergency providers could provide some of these services, there is a knowledge gap regarding palliative care in the emergency department setting. Emergency department-based palliative care programs are currently consultations for symptoms and/or goals of care, and have been initiated both by both the palliative care team and palliative care champions in the emergency department. Some programs have focused on the provision of hospice services through partnerships with hospice providers, which can potentially help emergency department providers with disposition.

Conclusion: Although some data on pilot programs are available, optimal models of delivery of emergency department-based palliative care have not been rigorously studied. Research is needed to determine how these services are best organized, what affect they will have on patients and caregivers, and whether they can decrease symptom burden and health care utilization.

Abstract
Background: Clinical indicators are powerful tools to quantify the safety and quality of patient care. Their validity is often unclear and definitions extremely heterogeneous. As part of the International Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative, this study aimed to derive a set of standardised and valid clinical outcome indicators for use in perioperative clinical trials.

Methods: We identified clinical indicators via a systematic review of the anaesthesia and perioperative medicine literature (PubMed/OVID, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library). We performed a three-stage Delphi consensus-gaining process that involved 54 clinician-researchers worldwide. Indicators were first shortlisted and the most suitable definitions for evaluation of quality and safety interventions determined. Indicators were then assessed for validity, reliability, feasibility, and clarity.

Results: We identified 167 clinical outcome indicators. Participation in the three Delphi rounds was 100% (n=13), 68% (n=54), and 85% (n= 6), respectively. A final list of eight outcome indicators was generated: surgical site infection at 30 days, stroke within 30 days of surgery, death within 30 days of coronary artery bypass grafting, death within 30 days of surgery, admission to the intensive care unit within 14 days of surgery, readmission to hospital within 30 days of surgery, and length of hospital stay (with or without in-hospital mortality). They were rated by the majority of experts as valid, reliable, easy to use, and clearly defined.

Conclusions: These clinical indicators can be confidently used as endpoints in clinical trials measuring quality, safety, and improvement in perioperative care.

Abstract
Objective: To measure prevalence of multimorbidity and complex multimorbidity in the Australian population from a nationally representative prospective study and to identify the most prevalent patterns of chronic conditions and body systems affected.

Methods: A sub-study of the nationally representative BEACH program, using a random sample of 8,707 patients at encounters with 290 general practitioners. All diagnosed chronic conditions were recorded for each patient. Multimorbidity was defined as co-occurrence of 2+ chronic conditions, while complex multimorbidity was defined as 3+ body systems each affected by at least one chronic condition.

Results: We estimated: 47.4% of patients at GP encounters and one-third (32.6%) of the population had multimorbidity; and 27.4% of patients at GP encounters and 17.0% of the Australian population had complex multimorbidity. The most prevalent combination pattern of three conditions was hypertension+hyperlipidaemia+ osteoarthritis (5.5% of patient at encounters and 3.3% of the population). Most prevalent combination of three body systems affected was circulatory+musculoskeletal+endocrine / nutritional/metabolic systems (11.1% of patients at encounters and 7.0% of the population).

Conclusions and implications: A significant proportion of Australians have not only multimorbidity, but complex multimorbidity. To meet the challenge posed by complex multimorbidity, the single disease focus of our healthcare system needs to be re-evaluated.

Abstract
The traditional approach for measuring outcomes after surgery involves ascertaining whether a patient survived surgery while avoiding major complications. This approach does not capture the full spectrum of events that are meaningful to patients, especially because mortality risks after elective surgery are relatively low, and different complication types vary considerably with respect to their impact on postoperative recovery. This review discusses the application, advantages, disadvantages and select examples of patient-centred outcomes in peri-operative medicine. When applied appropriately, these outcomes complement traditional clinical outcomes, identify important changes in postoperative function that impact patients without discernible complications and ensure that the definition of success after surgery is more meaningful to all relevant stakeholders.

Abstract
Background: The development of skills, behaviors and attitudes regarding patient safety is of utmost importance for promoting safety culture for the next generation of health professionals. This study describes our experience of implementing a course on patient safety and quality improvement for fourth year medical students in Mexico during the COVID-19 outbreak. The course comprised essential knowledge based on the patient safety curriculum provided by the WHO. We also explored perceptions and attitudes of students regarding patient safety. Methods: Fourth year medical students completed a questionnaire regarding knowledge, skills, and attitudes on patient safety and quality improvement in medical care. The questionnaire was voluntarily answered online prior to and after the course. Results: In total, 213 students completed the questionnaires. Most students were able to understand medical error, recognize failure and the nature of causation, perform root-cause analysis, and appreciate the role of patient safety interventions. Conversely, a disapproving perspective prevailed among students concerning the preventability of medical errors, utility of reporting systems, just culture and infrastructure (p < 0.05). Conclusion: We found students had a positive perspective concerning learning quality in healthcare and patient safety during our course; nevertheless, their perception of the usefulness of reporting systems to prevent future adverse events and prevent medical errors is uncomplimentary. Medical education should promote error reporting and just culture to change the current perception of medical students.

Abstract
Although palliative care focuses on supporting patients and families through serious illness, it is underutilized in the surgical intensive care unit (SICU). In 2020, patients in the SICU represented only 2.75% of our palliative team's consults. We hypothesize that utilization of palliative care triggers in the SICU will increase collaboration between SICU and palliative care teams and improve patient/family experiences. After reviewing our team's consultation records and the published literature, a consult trigger program was implemented for patients with a SICU length of stay >10 days, unplanned SICU readmission, or new diagnosis of metastatic cancer. A pre-intervention survey assessed SICU providers' perceptions of palliative care. Retrospective analysis evaluated qualitative and quantitative measures. 97% of SICU providers felt increased palliative care would be helpful. During the 6-month project, January 1, 2021 - June 30, 2021, our palliative team performed 27 triggered consults, representing 3.3% of the total 818 consults performed during this period and thus a 20% increase in SICU palliative consults. Triggered consults represented many primary surgical services and the most common consult reason was length-of-stay. All consults included discussions about goals of care and 16 of the 27 patients/families expressed restorative goals. Numerous notes documented family appreciation.

Keywords: palliative care; surgical intensive care; trigger consult program.

Abstract
Objective: We sought to assess the performance of the Predictive OpTimal Trees in Emergency Surgery Risk (POTTER) tool in elderly emergency surgery (ES) patients.

Summary background data: The POTTER tool was derived using a novel Artificial Intelligence (AI)-methodology called optimal classification trees and validated for prediction of ES outcomes. POTTER outperforms all existent risk-prediction models and is available as an interactive smartphone application. Predicting outcomes in elderly patients has been historically challenging and POTTER has not yet been tested in this population.

Methods: All patients ≥65 years who underwent ES in the ACS-NSQIP 2017 database were included. POTTER's performance for 30-day mortality and 18 postoperative complications (eg, respiratory or renal failure) was assessed using c-statistic methodology, with planned sub-analyses for patients 65 to 74, 75 to 84, and 85+ years.

Results: A total of 29,366 patients were included, with mean age 77, 55.8% females, and 62% who underwent emergency general surgery. POTTER predicted mortality accurately in all patients over 65 (c-statistic 0.80). Its best performance was in patients 65 to 74 years (c-statistic 0.84), and its worst in patients ≥85 years (c-statistic 0.71). POTTER had the best discrimination for predicting septic shock (c-statistic 0.90), respiratory failure requiring mechanical ventilation for ≥48 hours (c-statistic 0.86), and acute renal failure (c-statistic 0.85).

Conclusions: POTTER is a novel, interpretable, and highly accurate predictor of in-hospital mortality in elderly ES patients up to age 85 years. POTTER could prove useful for bedside counseling and for benchmarking of ES care.

Abstract
Introduction: Major surgery accounts for a substantial proportion of health service activity, due not only to the primary procedure, but the longer-term health implications of poor short-term outcome. Data from small studies or from outside the UK indicate that rates of complications and failure to rescue vary between hospitals, as does compliance with best practice processes. Within the UK, there is currently no system for monitoring postoperative complications (other than short-term mortality) in major non-cardiac surgery. Further, there is variation between national audit programmes, in the emphasis placed on quality assurance versus quality improvement, and therefore the principles of measurement and reporting which are used to design such programmes.

Methods and analysis: The PQIP patient study is a multi-centre prospective cohort study which recruits patients undergoing major surgery. Patient provide informed consent and contribute baseline and outcome data from their perspective using a suite of patient-reported outcome tools. Research and clinical staff complete data on patient risk factors and outcomes in-hospital, including two measures of complications. Longer-term outcome data are collected through patient feedback and linkage to national administrative datasets (mortality and readmissions). As well as providing a uniquely granular dataset for research, PQIP provides feedback to participating sites on their compliance with evidence-based processes and their patients' outcomes, with the aim of supporting local quality improvement.

Ethics and dissemination: Ethical approval has been granted by the Health Research Authority in the UK. Dissemination of interim findings (non-inferential) will form a part of the improvement methodology and will be provided to participating centres at regular intervals, including near-real time feedback of key process measures. Inferential analyses will be published in the peer-reviewed literature, supported by a comprehensive multi-modal communications strategy including to patients, policy makers and academic audiences as well as clinicians.

Abstract
Background: Patient-centred outcomes are increasingly used in perioperative clinical trials. The Standardised Endpoints in Perioperative Medicine (StEP) initiative aims to define which measures should be used in future research to facilitate comparison between studies and to enable robust evidence synthesis.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted to create a longlist of patient satisfaction, health-related quality of life, functional status, patient well-being, and life-impact measures for consideration. A three-stage Delphi consensus process involving 89 international experts was then conducted in order to refine this list into a set of recommendations.

Results: The literature review yielded six patient-satisfaction measures, seven generic health-related quality-of-life measures, eight patient well-being measures, five functional-status measures, and five life-impact measures for consideration. The Delphi response rates were 92%, 87%, and 100% for Rounds 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Three additional measures were added during the Delphi process as a result of contributions from the StEP group members. Firm recommendations have been made about one health-related quality-of-life measure (EuroQol 5 Dimension, five-level version with visual analogue scale), one functional-status measure (WHO Disability Assessment Schedule version 2.0, 12-question version), and one life-impact measure (days alive and out of hospital at 30 days after surgery). Recommendations with caveats have been made about the Bauer patient-satisfaction measure and two life-impact measures (days alive and out of hospital at 1 yr after surgery, and discharge destination).

Conclusions: Several patient-centred outcome measures have been recommended for use in future perioperative studies. We suggest that every clinical study should consider using at least one patient-centred outcome within a suite of endpoints.

Abstract
Surgical Apgar Score is a simple, 10-point scoring system in which a low score reliably identifies those patients at risk for adverse perioperative outcomes. Surgical techniques and anesthesia management should be directed in such a way that the Surgical Apgar Score remains higher to avoid postoperative morbidity and mortality.

Abstract
Background: Preoperative optimization is increasingly emphasized for high-risk surgical patients. One critical component of this includes preoperative advanced care planning to promote goal-concordant care. We aimed to define a subset of patients that might benefit from preoperative palliative care consult for advanced care planning.

Materials and methods: We examined adult patients admitted from January 2016 to December 2018 to a university health system for elective surgery. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with death within 1 y, and presence of palliative care consults preoperatively. Chi-square analysis evaluated the impact of a palliative care consult on advanced care planning variables.

Results: Of the 29,132 inpatient elective procedures performed, there was a 2.0% mortality rate at 6 mo and 3.5% at 1 y. Those who died were more likely to be older, male, underweight (BMI <18), or have undergone an otolaryngology, neurosurgery or thoracic procedure type (all P-values < 0.05). At the time of admission, 29% had an advance directive, 90% had a documented code status, and 0.3% had a preoperative palliative care consult. Patients were more likely to have an advanced directive, a power of attorney, a documented code status, and have a do not resuscitate order if they had a palliative care consult (all P-values <0.05). The mortality rates and preoperative palliative care rates per procedure type did not follow similar trends.

Conclusions: Preoperative palliative care consultation before elective admissions for surgery had a significant impact on advanced care planning.

Abstract
Postoperative complications occur despite optimal perioperative care and are an important driver of mortality after surgery. Failure to rescue, defined as death in a patient who has experienced serious complications, has emerged as a quality metric that provides a mechanistic pathway to explain disparities in mortality rates among hospitals that have similar perioperative complication rates. The risk of failure to rescue is higher after invasive surgical procedures and varies according to the type of postoperative complication. Multiple patient factors have been associated with failure to rescue. However, failure to rescue is more strongly correlated with hospital factors. In addition, microsystem factors, such as institutional safety culture, teamwork, and other attitudes and behaviors may interact with the hospital resources to effectively prevent patient deterioration. Early recognition through bedside and remote monitoring is the first step toward prevention of failure to rescue followed by rapid response initiatives and timely escalation of care.

Abstract
Palliative care, unlike hospice, can be utilized concurrently with disease-modifying or curative therapies. Some of the benefits of palliative care include improved quality of life, less end-of-life treatment, and decreased medical costs. Furthermore, palliative care can help guide treatment decisions to be in line with patients' physical, psychological, and spiritual needs. On the basis of these benefits, we advocate for palliative care involvement early in the course of advanced malignancy and other terminal diagnoses.

Abstract
Perioperative medicine is difficult to define, and thus, its progress may be hindered until internationally accepted definitions can be established within the field. The immediate agenda for perioperative physicians should be to agree upon such definitions in order to facilitate advancements in research, audits and outcome measurements. The REASON study, looking at institutions throughout New Zealand and Australia, confirmed that postoperative complications and mortality are important areas for multicentre trials.

Abstract
Hyponatremia is the most common electrolyte disorder, affecting more than 15% of patients in the hospital. Syndrome of inappropriate antidiuresis (SIAD) is the most frequent cause of hypotonic hyponatremia, mediated by nonosmotic release of arginine vasopressin (AVP, previously known as antidiuretic hormone), which acts on the renal V2 receptors to promote water retention. There are a variety of underlying causes of SIAD, including malignancy, pulmonary pathology, and central nervous system pathology. In clinical practice, the etiology of hyponatremia is frequently multifactorial and the management approach may need to evolve during treatment of a single episode. It is therefore important to regularly reassess clinical status and biochemistry, while remaining alert to potential underlying etiological factors that may become more apparent during the course of treatment. In the absence of severe symptoms requiring urgent intervention, fluid restriction (FR) is widely endorsed as the first-line treatment for SIAD in current guidelines, but there is considerable controversy regarding second-line therapy in instances where FR is unsuccessful, which occurs in around half of cases. We review the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and differential diagnosis of SIAD, and summarize recent evidence for therapeutic options beyond FR, with a focus on tolvaptan, urea, and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors.