US National Anesthesia Workload on Saturday and Sunday Mornings

Comparison of perioperative outcomes between colorectal operations performed on weekends vs those performed on weekdays

BACKGROUND

Weekend surgical time is an underused asset. Concerns over a possible weekend effect (substandard care) may be a barrier.

METHODS

This study examined whether a weekend effect applies to elective colorectal surgery via a single-center retrospective analysis comparing outcomes between patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery on a weekend vs a weekday. Demographics, length of stay (LOS), operative and anesthesia time, the rate of reoperation within 30 days, and the rate of major complications were compared between patient groups.

RESULTS

Of the 2008 patients identified, 1721 (85.7%) underwent surgery on a weekday, and 287 (14.3%) underwent surgery on a weekend. The proportion of operations with an open approach was higher on weekends than weekdays (49.5% vs 41.8%, P = .017). Patients who underwent surgery on the weekend tended to have a shorter mean (SE) for LOS (4.2 [0.2] vs 6.1 [0.2], P < .001), anesthesia time (233.8 [6.5] vs 307.6 [3.3] minutes, P < .001), and operative time (225.4 [6.4] vs. 297.6 [3.3] minutes, P < .001). On multivariable analysis, patients who had an operation on a weekend had a 38% lower chance of having a prolonged LOS (>75th percentile of LOS) compared with those who had an operation on a weekday (adjusted odds ratio = 0.62; 95% CI 0.42-0.92). There were no differences in rates of complications or reoperation for patients undergoing surgery on a weekend compared with a weekday.

CONCLUSION

At centers with experienced anesthesiologists, appropriately trained nursing staff, and expert surgeons, colorectal surgery performed on a weekend has similar safety outcomes as surgeries performed on a weekday.

An Overview of Commonly Used Data Sources in Observational Research in Anesthesia

Anesthesia research using existing databases has drastically expanded over the last decade. The most commonly used data sources in multi-institutional observational research are administrative databases and clinical registries. These databases are powerful tools to address research questions that are difficult to answer with smaller samples or single-institution information. Given that observational database research has established itself as valuable field in anesthesiology, we systematically reviewed publications in 3 high-impact North American anesthesia journals in the past 5 years with the goal to characterize its scope. We identified a wide range of data sources used for anesthesia-related research. Research topics ranged widely spanning questions regarding optimal anesthesia type and analgesic protocols to outcomes and cost of care both on a national and a local level. Researchers should choose their data sources based on various factors such as the population encompassed by the database, ability of the data to adequately address the research question, budget, acceptable limitations, available data analytics resources, and pipeline of follow-up studies.

Managing capacity for urgent surgery: staffing, staff scheduling in-house or on-call from home, and work assignments

Parmar and colleagues developed and validated a graphical method for choosing the number of operating theatres to set aside for urgent surgical cases. We address appropriate usage of their new method for calculating anaesthesia staffing, including comparison with previously published techniques. Parmar and colleagues' method is based on all staff scheduled in-house, rather than some on-call from home. We review that this is not nearly as large a limitation as it may seem because of behavioural factors of staff assignment.

Strategies for daily operating room management of ambulatory surgery centers following resolution of the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic

We performed a narrative review to explore the economics of daily operating room management decisions for ambulatory surgery centers following resolution of the acute phase of the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. It is anticipated that there will be a substantive fraction of patients who will be contagious, but asymptomatic at the time of surgery. Use multimodal perioperative infection control practices (e.g., including patient decontamination) and monitor performance (e.g., S. aureus transmission from patient to the environment). The consequence of COVID-19 is that such processes are more important than ever to follow because infection affects not only patients but the surgery center staff and surgeons. Dedicate most operating rooms to procedures that are not airway aerosol producing and can be performed without general anesthesia. Increase throughput by performing nerve blocks before patients enter the operating rooms. Bypass the phase I post-anesthesia care unit whenever possible by appropriate choices of anesthetic approach and drugs. Plan long-duration workdays (e.g., 12-h). For cases where the surgical procedure does not cause aerosol production, but general anesthesia will be used, have initial (phase I) post-anesthesia recovery in the operating room where the surgery was done. Use anesthetic practices that achieve fast initial recovery of the brief ambulatory cases. When the surgical procedure causes aerosol production (e.g., bronchoscopy), conduct phase I recovery in the operating room and use multimodal environmental decontamination after each case. Use statistical methods to plan for the resulting long turnover times. Whenever possible, have the anesthesia and nursing teams stagger cases in more than one room so that they are doing one surgical case while the other room is being cleaned. In conclusion, this review shows that while COVID-19 is prevalent, it will markedly affect daily ambulatory workflow for patients undergoing general anesthesia, with potentially substantial economic impact for some surgical specialties.

Seven-day services in surgery and the "weekend effect" at a Japanese teaching hospital: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Hospitals deliver 24-h, 7-day care on a 5-day workweek model, as fewer resources are available on weekends. In prior studies, poorer outcomes have been observed with weekend admission or surgery. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of 7-day service at a hospital, including outpatient consultations, diagnostic examinations and elective surgeries, on the likelihood of the "weekend effect" in surgery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent surgery between April 2014 and October 2016 at an academic medical centre in Tokyo, Japan. The main outcome measure was 30-day in-hospital mortality from the index surgery. The characteristics of the participants were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test or the chi-squared test as appropriate. Logistic regression was used to test for differences in the mortality rate between the two groups, and propensity score adjustments were made.

RESULTS

A total of 7442 surgeries were identified, of which, 1386 (19%) took place on the weekend. Of the 947 emergency surgeries, 25% (235) were performed on the weekend. The mortality following emergency weekday surgery was 21‰ (15/712), compared with 55‰ (13/235) following weekend surgery. Of the 6495 elective surgeries, 18% (1151) were performed on the weekend. The mortality following elective weekday surgery was 2.3‰ (12/5344), compared with 0.87‰ (1/1151) following weekend surgery. After adjustment, weekend surgeries were associated with an increased risk of death, especially in the emergency setting (emergency odds ratio: 2.7, 95% confidence interval: 1.2-6.5 vs. elective odds ratio: 0.4, 95% confidence interval: 0.05-3.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing emergency surgery on the weekend had higher 30-day mortality, but showed no difference in elective surgery mortality. These findings have potential implications for health administrators and policy makers who may try to restructure the hospital workweek or consider weekend elective surgery.

Assessing the global reach and value of a provider-facing healthcare app using large-scale analytics

BACKGROUND

The rapid global adoption of mobile health (mHealth) smartphone apps by healthcare providers presents challenges and opportunities in medicine. Challenges include ensuring the delivery of high-quality, up-to-date and optimised information. Opportunities include the ability to study global practice patterns, access to medical and surgical care and continuing medical education needs.

METHODS

We studied users of a free anaesthesia calculator app used worldwide. We combined traditional app analytics with in-app surveys to collect user demographics and feedback.

RESULTS

31 173 subjects participated. Users were from 206 countries and represented a spectrum of healthcare provider roles. Low-income country users had greater rates of app use (p<0.001) and ascribed greater importance of the app to their practice (p<0.001). Physicians from low-income countries were more likely to adopt the app (p<0.001). The app was used primarily for paediatric patients. The app was used around the clock, peaking during times typical for first start cases.

CONCLUSIONS

This mHealth app is a valuable decision support tool for global healthcare providers, particularly those in more resource-limited settings and with less training. App adoption and use may provide a mechanism for measuring longitudinal changes in access to surgical care and engaging providers in resource-limited settings. In-app surveys and app analytics provide a window into healthcare provider behaviour at a breadth and level of detail previously impossible to achieve. Given the potentially immense value of crowdsourced information, healthcare providers should be encouraged to participate in these types of studies.