Smokers know little of their increased surgical risks and may quit on surgical advice

The validity of self-reported smoking status on day of surgery in a mixed elective surgery population

Rates of misrepresenting smoking status on day of surgery varies with the clinical context. In perioperative smoking cessation trials, participants in the intervention group might be more likely to provide untruthful data about quitting when they have received substantial quit support but continued to smoke. The objective of this study was to determine misrepresentation rates of smoking status on day of surgery in mixed elective surgical populations, comparing groups offered or not offered additional cessation support. We undertook a post hoc analysis of data from three published randomised trials at a Melbourne public hospital that incorporated interventions during the wait-list period aimed at increasing smoking cessation. Participants were smokers (n = 1413) who were randomised to minimal cessation help at wait-listing (control group) or significant assistance, for example, mailed nicotine replacement (intervention group). Quit by day of surgery claims were verified by exhaled carbon monoxide (true cessation <8 parts per million). Verified cessation (>24 h) before surgery occurred in 161/1413 (11.4%) while 44/1413 (3.1%) misrepresented quitting. Continued smoking was in 1208/1413 (85.5%). Misrepresentations were higher in the intervention/offer of help groups (4.1%) than control groups (1.7%) (odds ratio (OR) 2.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.17 to 5.63, P = 0.012). Offering cessation help increased quitting odds by 77%, (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.52, P = 0.002). In contrast to other studies, we found group allocation in cessation trial settings had a significant effect on misrepresentation risk. The implication of this is that biochemical verification of quit status is essential in trial contexts for accurate data collection and to prevent misclassification bias.

"Because That is the Right Thing to do": A Focus Group Study of Australian Expert Perspectives on Offering Smoking Cessation Support in Lung Cancer Screening

INTRODUCTION

Lung cancer screening (LCS) trials, targeting people with a smoking history, have demonstrated reduced mortality. How to optimally embed evidence-based smoking cessation support in LCS, including in Australia, needs to be better understood. We sought experts' perspectives to identify potential barriers and effective implementation strategies.

AIMS AND METHODS

Perceptions of providing smoking cessation support in LCS were elicited in 24 focus groups and three individual interviews with clinicians, cancer screening program managers/policymakers, and researchers during 2021. We conducted framework analysis and mapped key topics to the updated Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

Experts (N = 84 participants) strongly supported capitalizing on an "opportune time" for smoking cessation and new LCS participant contact opportunities throughout the screening and assessment pathway. Many advocated for adapting existing cessation resources to the LCS setting and providing support without participant costs. Experts generally considered referral alone to established programs (eg, telephone Quitline) as insufficient, but likely helpful in follow-up, and dedicated cessation specialist roles as essential. Broader cessation messaging (via mass media/community channels) was also suggested to reinforce individualized support. Experts described inherent alignment, and an ethical responsibility, to deliver smoking cessation as a core LCS component. It was suggested that LCS-eligible participants' varied experiences of stigma, health literacy, and motivation, be considered in cessation support. Primary care support and individualized interventions were suggested to facilitate implementation.

CONCLUSIONS

Experts considered smoking cessation support essential in LCS. The expert-identified and multi-level implementation strategies described here can directly inform smoking cessation-specific planning for Australia's forthcoming National LCS Program.

IMPLICATIONS

The international literature includes few examples considering how best to provide smoking cessation support within a LCS program in advance of program commencement. Our analysis, using the updated CFIR, is one of the first to explore experts' perspectives within this context. Experts identified multiple implementation barriers to providing smoking cessation support within and outside of an Australian LCS program, including key work infrastructure barriers, and advocated for providing tailored interventions within this program. Our foundational work in a new targeted screening program's preimplementation phase will allow international comparisons to be made.

If the peri-operative patient pathway was right, what would it look like?

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing surgery deserve the best possible peri-operative outcomes. Each stage of the peri-operative patient journey offers opportunities to improve care delivery, with shorter lengths of stay, less complications, reduced costs and better value.

METHODS

These opportunities were identified through narrative review of the literature, with consultation and consensus at the hidden pandemic (of postoperative complications) summit 2, July 2023 in Adelaide, Australia RESULTS: Before surgery: Some patients who receive timely alternative treatments may not need surgery at all. The period of waiting after listing should be a time of preparation. Risk assessment at the time of surgical listing facilitates recognition of need for comorbidity optimisation and identifies those who will most benefit from prehabilitation, particularly frail and deconditioned patients.

DURING SURGERY

During the surgical admission, ERAS programs result in less postoperative complications, shorter length of stay and better patient experience but require agreement between clinicians, and coordinated monitoring of delivery of the elements in the ERAS bundle of care.

AFTER SURGERY

At-risk patients need to have the appropriate levels of monitoring for cardiovascular instability, renal impairment or respiratory dysfunction, to facilitate timely, proactive management if they develop. Access to allied health in the early postoperative period is also critical for promoting mobility, and earlier discharge, particularly after joint surgery. Where appropriate, provision of rehabilitation services at home improves patient experience and adds value. The peri-operative patient journey begins and ends with primary care so there is a need for clear communication, documentation, around sharing of responsibility between practitioners at each stage.

CONCLUSION

Identifying and mitigating risk to reduce complications and length of stay in hospital will improve outcomes for patients and deliver the best value for the health system.

Barriers and facilitators to perioperative smoking cessation: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

Smoking cessation interventions are underutilized in the surgical setting. We aimed to systematically identify the barriers and facilitators to smoking cessation in the surgical setting.

METHODS

Following the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) framework for scoping reviews, we searched 5 databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and PsycINFO) for quantitative or qualitative studies published in English (since 2000) evaluating barriers and facilitators to perioperative smoking cessation interventions. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis and mapped to the theoretical domains framework (TDF).

RESULTS

From 31 studies, we identified 23 unique barriers and 13 facilitators mapped to 11 of the 14 TDF domains. The barriers were within the domains of knowledge (e.g., inadequate knowledge of smoking cessation interventions) in 23 (74.2%) studies; environmental context and resources (e.g., lack of time to deliver smoking cessation interventions) in 19 (61.3%) studies; beliefs about capabilities (e.g., belief that patients are nervous about surgery/diagnosis) in 14 (45.2%) studies; and social/professional role and identity (e.g., surgeons do not believe it is their role to provide smoking cessation interventions) in 8 (25.8%) studies. Facilitators were mainly within the domains of environmental context and resources (e.g., provision of quit smoking advice as routine surgical care) in 15 (48.4%) studies, reinforcement (e.g., surgery itself as a motivator to kickstart quit attempts) in 8 (25.8%) studies, and skills (e.g., smoking cessation training and awareness of guidelines) in 5 (16.2%) studies.

CONCLUSION

The identified barriers and facilitators are actionable targets for future studies aimed at translating evidence informed smoking cessation interventions into practice in perioperative settings. More research is needed to evaluate how targeting these barriers and facilitators will impact smoking outcomes.

Patient characteristics and preferences for a surgical prehabilitation program design: results from a pilot survey

PURPOSE

Surgical prehabilitation aims to reduce a decline in the functional capacity thereby optimising health and fitness before surgery. One of the major barriers in successfully implementing a prehabilitation program in hospitals has been poor patient adherence. In our pilot survey on surgical patients, we sought to explore patient preferences regarding the program design, the barriers and enablers to patient participation in a multimodal prehabilitation program.

METHODS

The survey was administered to patients undergoing major abdominal surgery in the preoperative period. The first two parts of the instrument mainly included questions on demographics, social history, activity levels, interest towards prehabilitation program and their involvement in co-design, preferences towards the components of the program, the barriers and enablers. The last part of survey included symptom and physical assessments.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 24 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. The median age of our cohort was 71 (range 35-91) years and 75% were retired. 75% of our participants were extremely interested in improving health and fitness and 63% were very keen to co-design their program when explained. Home-based programs were preferred by most participants and among exercises, walking was preferred by 71% of the participants. One third of the participants were interested in professional dietary counselling. There were only two participants who preferred group psychological therapy while 25% preferred individual psychological counselling sessions.

CONCLUSION

Our survey highlighted a need to design a personalised program with tailored interventions due to the wide variation in the interest and preferences among surgical patients.

A practical guide for perioperative smoking cessation

The perioperative management of patients who are smokers presents anesthesiologists with various challenges related to respiratory, circulatory, and other clinical problems. Regarding 30-day postoperative outcomes, smokers have higher risks of mortality and complications than non-smokers, including death, pneumonia, unplanned tracheal intubation, mechanical ventilation, cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Given the benefits of smoking cessation and the adverse effects of smoking on perioperative patient management, patients should quit smoking long before surgery. However, anesthesiologists cannot address these issues alone. The Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists established guidelines in 2015 (published in a medical journal in 2017) to enlighten surgical staff members and patients regarding perioperative tobacco cessation. The primary objective of perioperative smoking cessation is to reduce the risks of adverse cardiovascular and respiratory events, wound infection, and other perioperative complications. Perioperative preparations constitute a powerful teachable moment, a "golden opportunity" for smoking cessation to achieve improved primary disease outcomes and prevent the occurrence of tobacco-related conditions. This review updates the aforementioned guidelines as a practical guide to cover the nuts and bolts of perioperative smoking cessation. Its goal is to assist surgeons, anesthesiologists, and other medical professionals and to increase patients' awareness of smoking risks before elective surgery.

Offering mailed nicotine replacement therapy and Quitline support before elective surgery: a randomised controlled trial

Objective

To assess whether offering free mailed nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and telephone counselling to smokers on elective surgery waiting lists increases quitting before surgery.

Design, setting

Randomised, controlled trial at Frankston Hospital, a public tertiary referral hospital in Melbourne.

Participants

Adult smokers added to elective surgery waiting lists for operations at least ten days in the future, 1 April 2019 ‒ 3 April 2020.

Intervention

In addition to normal care, intervention participants received a brochure on the risks of low frequency smoking, an offer of Quitline call‐back registration, and an offer of mailed NRT according to reported daily smoking: 1‒9 cigarettes/day, 2 mg lozenges; 10‒15/day, 7‒14 mg patches [three weeks] and 2 mg lozenges; > 15/day, 7‒21 mg patches [five weeks] and 2 mg lozenges.

Main outcome measures

Primary outcome: quitting at least 24 hours before surgery, verified by exhaled carbon monoxide testing. Secondary outcomes: quitting at least four weeks before surgery, adverse events, and (for those who had quit before surgery) abstinence three months after surgery.

Results

Of 748 eligible participants (control, 363; intervention, 385), 516 (69%) had undergone elective surgery when the trial was terminated early (for COVID‐19‐related reasons) (intervention group, 274; control group, 242). 122 of the 385 intervention participants (32%) had accepted the offer of cessation support. The proportions of intervention participants who quit at least 24 hours before surgery (18% v 9%; odds ratio [OR], 1.97; 95% CI, 1.22‒3.15) or at least four weeks before surgery (9% v 4%; OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.08–4.50) were larger than for the control group. Three months after surgery, 27 of 58 intervention (47%) and 12 of 25 control participants (48%) who quit before surgery reported not smoking in the preceding seven days. No major adverse events were reported.

Conclusion

Uptake of free mailed NRT and Quitline support by smokers on elective surgery waiting lists was good, and offering additional support was associated with higher proportions of smokers quitting before surgery.

Trial registration

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12619000032156 (prospective).

Clinical practice guideline: evidence, recommendations and algorithm for the preoperative optimization of anemia, hyperglycemia and smoking

Preoperative optimization has not been explored comprehensively in the surgical literature, as this responsibility has often been divided among surgery, anesthesia and medicine. We developed an evidence-based clinical practice guideline to summarize existing evidence and present diagnostic and treatment algorithms for use by surgeons caring for patients scheduled to undergo major elective surgery. We focus on 3 common comorbid conditions seen across surgical specialties - anemia, hyperglycemia and smoking - as these conditions increase complication rates in patients undergoing major surgery and can be optimized successfully as soon as 6-8 weeks before surgery. With the ability to address these conditions earlier in the patient journey, surgeons can positively affect patient outcomes. The aim of this guideline is to bring optimization in the preoperative period under the existing umbrella of evidence-based surgical care.

Smoking Characteristics and Readiness-to-Quit Status Among Smokers Attending Preoperative Assessment Clinic - A Prospective Cohort Study

Background

Perioperative smoking is associated with an increased incidence of general postoperative morbidity and mortality. The perioperative period is recognized as an important “teachable moment” that can motivate patients to adopt health changing behaviors.

Objective

In this study, we aimed to determine the prevalence of smokers among elective surgical patients in an Asian tertiary hospital. We also investigated their smoking characteristics, previous quitting attempts, readiness-to-quit status as well as knowledge of smoking-related postoperative complications.

Methods

We conducted a single-center prospective cohort study among all patients who attended a preoperative assessment clinic within a 2-month period (August to September 2020) using a preoperative smoking questionnaire.

Results

A total of 3362 patients participated in the study, of which 348 (10.4%) were current smokers. More than half (65.6%) of the smokers had previously attempted to quit smoking, with most (78%) having made more than one attempt. Forty-nine percent of current smokers were in the pre-contemplation stage of quitting and thirty-one percent were in the contemplation stage. Only twenty-one percent were in the preparation stage of quitting. Thirty-eight percent of patients recognized the importance of smoking cessation perioperatively but only twenty-eight percent were confident of quitting perioperatively. Less than sixty percent of smokers were aware of at least one type of smoking-related postoperative complication. Less than half of the patients (45%) had ever received advice on perioperative smoking cessation from the surgeons.

Conclusion

A thorough understanding of smokers’ smoking characteristics, barriers to quit and readiness-to-quit status are crucial to establishing a successful multidisciplinary perioperative smoking cessation program. Counselling should address knowledge deficits and be tailored to a patient’s stage-of-change in order to seize this precious perioperative “teachable moment”.

The value of teachable moments in surgical patient care and the supportive role of digital technologies

Evidence strongly supports improved outcomes following surgery when patients are more physically active, have better dietary intake, or are generally fitter prior to surgery. Having an operation is a major life event for patients, and many are not educated around what they can do as individuals to aid a speedier and more successful recovery following their operation. What if there was a time point before surgery where clinicians could inspire patients to adjust their lifestyles for the better, in order to see fewer complications after surgery? This is where the concept of teachable moments comes into play.

This commentary explores the concept of teachable moments and their value in surgical patient care and discusses the potentially under-utilized opportunities on hand to the surgical multidisciplinary team to remotely support patients using digital health technologies.

How Can Smoking Cessation Be Induced Before Surgery? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Behavior Change Techniques and Other Intervention Characteristics

Background: Smokers who continue to smoke up to the point of surgery are at increased risk of a range of complications during and following surgery.

Objective: To identify whether behavioral and/or pharmacological interventions increase the likelihood that smokers quit prior to elective surgery and which intervention components are associated with larger effects.

Design: Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Data sources: MEDLINE, Embase, and Embase Classic, CINAHL, CENTRAL.

Study selection: Studies testing the effect of smoking reduction interventions delivered at least 24 h before elective surgery were included.

Study appraisal and synthesis: Potential studies were independently screened by two people. Data relating to study characteristics and risk of bias were extracted. The effects of the interventions on pre-operative smoking abstinence were estimated using random effects meta-analyses. The association between specific intervention components (behavior change techniques; mode; duration; number of sessions; interventionist) and smoking cessation effect sizes were estimated using meta-regressions.

Results: Twenty-two studies comprising 2,992 smokers were included and 19 studies were meta-analyzed. Interventions increased the proportion of smokers who were abstinent or reduced smoking by surgery relative to control: g = 0.56, 95% CI 0.32–0.80, with rates nearly double in the intervention (46.2%) relative to the control (24.5%). Interventions that comprised more sessions, delivered face-to-face and by nurses, as well as specific behavior change techniques (providing information on consequence of smoking/cessation; providing information on withdrawal symptoms; goal setting; review of goals; regular monitoring by others; and giving options for additional or later support) were associated with larger effects.

Conclusion: Rates of smoking can be halved prior to surgery and a number of intervention characteristics can increase these effects. There was, however, some indication of publication bias meaning the benefits of such interventions may be smaller than estimated.

Registration: Prospero 2015: CRD42015024733

Identifying and recruiting smokers for preoperative smoking cessation--a systematic review of methods reported in published studies

BACKGROUND

Smoking cessation before surgery reduces postoperative complications, and the benefit is positively associated with the duration of being abstinent before a surgical procedure. A key issue in providing preoperative smoking cessation support is to identify people who smoke as early as possible before elective surgery. This review aims to summarise methods used to identify and recruit smokers awaiting elective surgery.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, and references of relevant reviews (up to May 2014) to identify prospective studies that evaluated preoperative smoking cessation programmes. One reviewer extracted and a second reviewer checked data from the included studies. Data extracted from included studies were presented in tables and narratively described.

RESULTS

We included 32 relevant studies, including 18 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and 14 non-randomised studies (NRS). Smokers were recruited at preoperative clinics (n = 18), from surgery waiting lists (n = 6), or by general practitioners (n = 1), and the recruitment methods were not explicitly described in seven studies. Time points of preoperative recruitment of smokers was unclear in four studies, less than 4 weeks before surgery in 17 studies, and at least 4 weeks before surgery in only 11 studies. The recruitment rate tended to be lower in RCTs (median 58.2 %, range 9.1 to 90.9 %) than that in NRS (median 99.1 %, range 12.3 to 100 %) and lower in preoperative clinic-based RCTs (median 54.4 %, range 9.1 to 82.4 %) than that in waiting list-based RCTs (median 70.1 %, range 36.8 to 85.0 %). Smokers were recruited at least 4 weeks before surgery in four of the six waiting list-based studies and in only three of the 18 preoperative clinic-based studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Published studies often inadequately described the methods for recruiting smokers into preoperative smoking cessation programmes. Although smoking cessation at any time is beneficial, many programmes recruited smokers at times very close to scheduled surgery so that the benefit of preoperative smoking cessation may have not been fully effected. Optimal delivery of preoperative smoking cessation remains challenging, and further research is required to develop effective preoperative cessation programmes for smokers awaiting elective operations.

The Stop Smoking Before Surgery Program: Impact on Awareness of Smoking-Related Perioperative Complications and Smoking Behavior in Northern Canadian Communities

Objective: This study aimed to examine the impact of a Stop Smoking Before Surgery (SSBS) program in a health authority where responsibility for surgical services is shared by health professionals in regional centers and outlying communities. Methods: A between-subjects, pre-post mixed method program evaluation was conducted. Elective surgery patients at 2 Northern Canadian hospitals were recruited and surveyed at 2 time points: pre-SSBS implementation (n = 150) and 1 year post-SSBS implementation (n = 90). In addition, semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposeful sample of participants (n = 18). Results: Participants who received information about stopping smoking before surgery post-SSBS implementation were more likely than expected to have reduced their smoking, χ²(1, 89) = 10.62, P = .001, and had a significantly higher Awareness of Smoking-Related Perioperative Complications score than those that were advised to quit smoking prior to SSBS implementation (U = 1288.0, P < .001). Being advised by a health care professional was the second strongest predictor of whether or not participants reduced their smoking before surgery post-SSBS implementation. However, there was no significant change in the number of participants who reported being advised to quit smoking before surgery between groups. Conclusion: Providing surgery-specific resources to increase awareness of and support for surgery-specific smoking cessation had limited success in this rural context. Additional strategies are needed to ensure that every surgical patient who smokes receives information about the benefits of quitting for surgery and is aware of available cessation resources.

Factors associated with conversion from laparoscopic to open colectomy using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database

AIM

Conversion rates from laparoscopic to open colectomy and associated factors are traditionally reported in clinical trials or reviews of outcomes from experienced institutions. Indications and selection criteria for laparoscopic colectomy may be more narrowly defined in these circumstances. With the increased adoption of laparoscopy, conversion rates using national data need to be closely examined. The purpose of this study was to use data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) to identify factors associated with conversion of laparoscopic to open colectomy at a national scale in the United States.

METHOD

The ACS-NSQIP Participant Use Data Files for 2006-2011 were used to identify patients who had undergone laparoscopic colectomy. Converted cases were identified using open colectomy as the primary procedure and laparoscopic colectomy as 'other procedure'. Preoperative variables were identified and statistics were calculated using sas version 9.3. Logistic regression was used to model the multivariate relationship between patient variables and conversion status.

RESULTS

Laparoscopy was successfully performed in 41 585 patients, of whom 2508 (5.8%) required conversion to an open procedure. On univariate analysis the following factors were significant: age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, presence of diabetes, smoking, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, ascites, stroke, weight loss and chemotherapy (P < 0.05). The following factors remained significant on multivariate analysis: age, BMI, ASA class, smoking, ascites and weight loss.

CONCLUSION

Multiple significant factors for conversion from laparoscopic to open colectomy were identified. A novel finding was the increased risk of conversion for underweight patients. As laparoscopic colectomy is become increasingly utilized, factors predictive of conversion to open procedures should be sought via large national cohorts.