SNAP-2 EPICCS: the second Sprint National Anaesthesia Project-EPIdemiology of Critical Care after Surgery: protocol for an international observational cohort study

S Ramani Moonesinghe, Danny J N Wong, Laura Farmer, Richard Shawyer, Paul S Myles, Steve K Harris, SNAP-2 Project team and Steering Group, S Ramani Moonesinghe, Danny J N Wong, Laura Farmer, Richard Shawyer, Paul S Myles, Steve K Harris, SNAP-2 Project team and Steering Group

Abstract

Introduction: The admission of high-risk patients to critical care after surgery is a recommended standard of care. Nevertheless, poor compliance against this recommendation has been repeatedly demonstrated in large epidemiological studies. It is unclear whether this is due to reasons of capacity, equipoise, poor quality clinical care or because hospitals are working creatively to create capacity for augmented care on normal surgical wards. The EPIdemiology of Critical Care after Surgery study aims to address these uncertainties.

Methods and analysis: One-week observational cohort study in the UK and Australasia. All patients undergoing inpatient (overnight stay) surgery will be included. All will have prospective data collection on risk factors, surgical procedure and postoperative outcomes including the primary outcome of morbidity (measured using the Postoperative Morbidity Survey on day 7 after surgery) and secondary outcomes including length of stay and mortality. Data will also be collected on critical care referral and admission, surgical cancellations and critical care occupancy. The epidemiology of patient characteristics, processes and outcomes will be described. Inferential techniques (multilevel multivariable regression, propensity score matching and instrumental variable analysis) will be used to evaluate the relationship between critical care admission and postoperative outcome.

Ethics and dissemination: The study has received ethical approval from the National Research Ethics Service in the UK and equivalent in Australasia. The collection of patient identifiable data without prior consent has been approved by the Confidentiality Advisory Group (England and Wales) and the Public Privacy and Patient Benefit Panel (Scotland). In these countries, patient identifiable data will be used to link prospectively collected data with national registers of death and inpatient administrative data. The study findings will be disseminated using a multimedia approach with the support of our lay collaborators, to patients, public, policy-makers, clinical and academic audiences.

Keywords: anaesthetics; epiemiology; instrumental variable analysis; perioperative; surgery.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: Employer of SRM receives reimbursement for her role as a director of the NIAA Health Services Research Centre. SRM is a Health Foundation Improvement Science Fellow and receives additional funding from the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre funding scheme (UCLH) and for her role as a local NIHR Specialty Group Lead. SRM is associate National Clinical Director for elective care with NHS England.

© Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

References

    1. Weiser TG, Haynes AB, Molina G, et al. . Estimate of the global volume of surgery in 2012: an assessment supporting improved health outcomes. Lancet 2015;385(Suppl 2):S11 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60806-6
    1. NELA Project Team. First patient report of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit. London, U.K: Royal College of Anaesthetists, 2015.
    1. NELA Project Team. Second patient report of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit. London, U.K: Royal College of Anaesthetists, 2016.
    1. Moonesinghe SR, Harris S, Mythen MG, et al. . Survival after postoperative morbidity: a longitudinal observational cohort study. Br J Anaesth 2014;113:977–84. 10.1093/bja/aeu224
    1. Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Complications, failure to rescue, and mortality with major inpatient surgery in medicare patients. Ann Surg 2009;250:1029–34. 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181bef697
    1. Ghaferi AA, Osborne NH, Birkmeyer JD, et al. . Hospital characteristics associated with failure to rescue from complications after pancreatectomy. J Am Coll Surg 2010;211:325–30. 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.04.025
    1. Anderson ID. The Higher Risk General Surgical Patient: towards improved care fora forgotton group. Royal College of Surgeons and the Department of Health, 2011.
    1. Pearse RM, Moreno RP, Bauer P, et al. . Mortality after surgery in Europe: a 7 day cohort study. Lancet 2012;380:1059–65. 10.1016/S0140-6736(12)61148-9
    1. Pearse RM, Harrison DA, James P, et al. . Identification and characterisation of the high-risk surgical population in the United Kingdom. Crit Care 2006;10:R81 10.1186/cc4928
    1. Rose G. Strategy of prevention: lessons from cardiovascular disease. Br Med J 1981;282:1847–51. 10.1136/bmj.282.6279.1847
    1. Rose G. Sick individuals and sick populations. Int J Epidemiol 1985;14:32–8. 10.1093/ije/14.1.32
    1. Wijeysundera DN, Pearse RM, Shulman MA, et al. . Measurement of Exercise Tolerance before Surgery (METS) study: a protocol for an international multicentre prospective cohort study of cardiopulmonary exercise testing prior to major non-cardiac surgery. BMJ Open 2016;6:e010359 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010359
    1. Moonesinghe SR. Individualised surgical outcomes: please look the other way. Postgrad Med J 2013;89:677–8. 10.1136/postgradmedj-2013-132442
    1. Adhikari NK, Fowler RA, Bhagwanjee S, et al. . Critical care and the global burden of critical illness in adults. Lancet 2010;376:1339–46. 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60446-1
    1. Rhodes A, Ferdinande P, Flaatten H, et al. . The variability of critical care bed numbers in Europe. Intensive Care Med 2012;38:1647–53. 10.1007/s00134-012-2627-8
    1. Walker EM, Bell M, Cook TM, et al. . Patient reported outcome of adult perioperative anaesthesia in the United Kingdom: a cross-sectional observational study. Br J Anaesth 2016;117:758–66. 10.1093/bja/aew381
    1. Cook TM, Woodall N, Frerk C. Major complications of airway management in the UK: results of the Fourth National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Difficult Airway Society. Part 1: anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2011;106:617–31. 10.1093/bja/aer058
    1. Pandit JJ, Andrade J, Bogod DG, et al. . 5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia: summary of main findings and risk factors. Br J Anaesth 2014;113:549–59. 10.1093/bja/aeu313
    1. Moonesinghe SR, Walker EM, Bell M. Design and methodology of SNAP-1: a Sprint National Anaesthesia Project to measure patient reported outcome after anaesthesia. Perioper Med 2015;4:4 10.1186/s13741-015-0011-2
    1. Dickinson K, Bunn F, Wentz R, et al. . Size and quality of randomised controlled trials in head injury: review of published studies. BMJ 2000;320:1308–11. 10.1136/bmj.320.7245.1308
    1. Grocott MP, Browne JP, Van der Meulen J, et al. . The postoperative morbidity survey was validated and used to describe morbidity after major surgery. J Clin Epidemiol 2007;60:919–28. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.12.003
    1. Patel AB, Reyes A, Ackland GL. Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity. PeerJ 2015;3:e1466:31466 10.7717/peerj.1466
    1. Moonesinghe SR, Mythen MG, Das P, et al. . Risk stratification tools for predicting morbidity and mortality in adult patients undergoing major surgery: qualitative systematic review. Anesthesiology 2013;119:959–81. 10.1097/ALN.0b013e3182a4e94d
    1. Protopapa KL, Simpson JC, Smith NC, et al. . Development and validation of the Surgical Outcome Risk Tool (SORT). Br J Surg 2014;101:1774–83. 10.1002/bjs.9638

Source: PubMed

3
구독하다