Which anaesthetic agents are cost-effective in day surgery? Literature review, national survey of practice and randomised controlled trial

Recruitment, consent and retention of participants in randomised controlled trials: a review of trials published in the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Journals Library (1997-2020)

OBJECTIVES

To review the consent, recruitment and retention rates for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) funded by the UK's National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and published in the online NIHR Journals Library between January 1997 and December 2020.

DESIGN

Comprehensive review.

SETTING

RCTs funded by the NIHR and published in the NIHR Journals Library.

DATA EXTRACTION

Information relating to the trial characteristics, sample size, recruitment and retention.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was the recruitment rate (number of participants recruited per centre per month). Secondary outcomes were the target sample size and whether it was achieved; consent rates (percentage of eligible participants who consented and were randomised) and retention rates (percentage of randomised participants retained and assessed with valid primary outcome data).

RESULTS

This review identified 388 individual RCTs from 379 reports in the NIHR Journals Library. The final recruitment target sample size was achieved in 63% (245/388) of the RCTs. The original recruitment target was revised in 30% (118/388) of trials (downwards in 67% (79/118)). The median recruitment rate (participants per centre per month) was found to be 0.95 (IQR: 0.42-2.60); the median consent rate was 72% (IQR: 50%-88%) and the median retention rate was estimated at 88% (IQR: 80%-97%).

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variation in the consent, recruitment and retention rates in publicly funded RCTs. Although the majority of (6 out of 10) trials in this review achieved their final target sample; 3 out of 10 trials revised their original target sample size (downwards in 7 out of 10 trials). Investigators should bear this in mind at the planning stage of their study and not be overly optimistic about their recruitment projections.

Total intravenous anesthesia vs inhalational anesthesia in patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia. Cost-minimization study

Introduction: The methods most frequently used at the present time in Colombia for the administration of general anesthesia are based on halogenated and intravenous drugs. However, in view of the lack of differential clinical outcomes, the existence of cost variations between the two is not clear. Objective: To determine the expected cost of the use of both techniques in patients taken to surgery, within the framework of the Colombian national health system. Methods: A cost minimization study was carried out using the decision tree as the analytical model. A time frame of 6 postoperative hours was used as the assumption. Only direct healthcare-related costs were included using a case study approach. An econometric model was used based on the frequency with which each technology is applied and the type of drug used, and a deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. Results: For the case study, total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) is more costly than the inhalational technique, with an incremental cost of $102,718 per patient. The deterministic analysis shows that both the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) as well as the use of target controlled infusion (TCI) techniques are the main cost determinants. The probabilistic analysis shows that the cost difference can even be nil in more than 50% of the simulated settings, when the difference in the risk of PONV is higher. Conclusions: Although the total intravenous technique can be more costly than the inhalational technique, this difference is offset by a lower cost of the postanesthesia care unit, given the lower risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

Consensus guidelines for the management of postoperative nausea and vomiting

The present guidelines are the most recent data on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and an update on the 2 previous sets of guidelines published in 2003 and 2007. These guidelines were compiled by a multidisciplinary international panel of individuals with interest and expertise in PONV under the auspices of the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia. The panel members critically and systematically evaluated the current medical literature on PONV to provide an evidence-based reference tool for the management of adults and children who are undergoing surgery and are at increased risk for PONV. These guidelines identify patients at risk for PONV in adults and children; recommend approaches for reducing baseline risks for PONV; identify the most effective antiemetic single therapy and combination therapy regimens for PONV prophylaxis, including nonpharmacologic approaches; recommend strategies for treatment of PONV when it occurs; provide an algorithm for the management of individuals at increased risk for PONV as well as steps to ensure PONV prevention and treatment are implemented in the clinical setting.

Implementation of a fast-track-pathway including analgo-sedation with local anaesthesia for outpatient varicose vein surgery: a cohort study

Objective

To evaluate the clinical and economical impact of a fast-track anaesthesia protocol in the management of primary varicose vein (VV) surgery.

Methods

Over a 10-month period (from 1 December 2009 to 30 September 2011), all patients eligible for open VV surgery ( N = 176) were enrolled in a fast-track clinical pathway including titrated analgo-sedation combined with local anaesthesia. This fast-track cohort was compared with a historical cohort undergoing similar procedures and receiving general anaesthesia (GA) or spinal anaesthesia (SA) (between 1 December 2009 to 30 September 2011, N = 200). The length of stay in the operating facilities and postoperative recovery areas were reported and hospital costs were estimated. In addition, the occurrence of adverse events and unplanned hospital admission were compared between the two consecutive periods.

Results

Patients characteristics and surgical procedure were not different in the two cohorts. After implementation of the fast-track pathway, the incidence of postoperative adverse events decreased from 41% to 2.3%, with no need for overnight hospital stay (0% versus 7%). The reduction in anaesthesia-controlled time (-47%) and in postoperative recovery time (-61%) were associated with an increased operating capacity (1 extra case per day) and with substantial cost-savings (mean reduction of €312 per case, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Implementation of a fast-track pathway for outpatient VV surgery was successful, safe and efficient. Analgo-sedation combined with infiltrative anaesthesia (instead of GA or SA) contributed to increase the operating capacity and to reduce the workload of nursing personnel.

Retrospective cohort study highlighted outcome reporting bias in UK publicly funded trials

OBJECTIVE

To assess outcome reporting bias and dissemination bias in trials funded by the National Health System (NHS) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) program.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

A retrospective cohort study of HTA monographs and corresponding journal publications including all clinical effectiveness randomized controlled trials published as HTA monographs between 1999 and 2005 by the NHS HTA program.

RESULTS

There was a higher median P-value (P=0.33, interquartile range [IQR]: 0.02-0.54) among trials without a journal publication compared with those with a journal publication (P=0.14, IQR: 0.007-0.43), although the difference was not statistically significant (Mann-Whitney U test, z=-0.70; P=0.48). A higher proportion of statistically significant findings were reported in journal articles when compared with the outcomes reported in the HTA monographs. Trials published in general medical journals tended to have smaller P-values (median: 0.05, IQR: 0.001-0.22) than those published in more specialist journals (median: 0.33 IQR: 0.008-0.58), although this result was not significant (Mann-Whitney U test, z=-1.63; P=0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Among journal-published trials, there were a greater proportion of statistically significant findings included in the journal reports compared with those in the HTA monographs.

Challenges in pediatric ambulatory anesthesia: kids are different

The care of the child having ambulatory surgery presents a specific set of challenges to the anesthesia provider. This review focuses on areas of clinical distinction that support the additional attention children often require, and on clinical controversies that require providers to have up-to-date information to guide practice and address parental concerns. These include perioperative risk; obstructive sleep apnea; obesity; postoperative nausea and vomiting; neurocognitive outcomes; and specific concerns regarding common ear, nose, and throat procedures.

The effect of anaesthetic agents on induction, recovery and patient preferences in adult day case surgery: a 7-day follow-up randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

To compare induction, pre- and post-discharge recovery characteristics and patient preferences between four anaesthetic regimens in adult day-surgery.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trial. In all, 1158 adults assigned to: propofol induction and maintenance, propofol induction with isoflurane/N2O, or sevoflurane/N2O maintenance, or sevoflurane/N2O alone. We prospectively recorded induction and pre-discharge recovery characteristics, collected 7-day post-discharge recovery characteristics using patient diaries and patient preferences by telephone follow-up.

RESULTS

Recruitment rate was 73%--of the 425 refusals, 226 were not willing to risk a volatile induction. During induction, excitatory movements and breath holding were more common with sevoflurane only (P < 0.01). Injection pain and hiccup were more common with propofol induction (P < 0.01). In the recovery room and the postoperative ward, both nausea and vomiting were more common with sevoflurane only (P < 0.01). This difference disappeared within 48 h. There was no difference between groups in the mental state on awakening, recovery time, time to discharge or overnight admissions; then was also no difference in pain between the four groups for each of the seven postoperative days (P < 0.01), nor any differences in concentration or forgetfulness. Patients took 6.5 days (95% CI: 6.0-7.0, n = 693) to resume normal activities. Patients who received sevoflurane only were more likely to recall an unpleasant induction and least likely to want the same induction method again (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Differences in outcome between the four regimens are transient; sevoflurane is not an ideal sole agent for adult day case anaesthesia and, in this setting, patients base their preferences for future anaesthetics on the method of induction.

A comparison of parents and pediatric anesthesiologists' preferences for attributes of child daycase surgery: a discrete choice experiment

BACKGROUND

Currently, there is little evidence relating to which attributes of pediatric daycase surgery are most important to parents; therefore, it is difficult for policy-makers in the UK to incorporate parents' preferences into pediatric daycase service provision. Additionally, few studies have considered anesthesiologists' preferences in this area. Parents and anesthesiologists' preferences for perioperative care of children undergoing daycase surgery may differ and this could affect levels of satisfaction with service provision. This study aimed to elicit and compare the relative importance of attributes of pediatric daycase surgery provision to parents and anesthesiologists using an established stated preference method, the discrete choice experiment. The attributes considered were: parental involvement in medical decision making; parental presence at induction of anaesthesia; quality of recovery from anaesthesia; staff attitude; postoperative pain and cost to the parents.

METHODS

A postal questionnaire including a discrete choice experiment was sent to (a) parents whose children had been admitted to hospital under a surgical consultant (n = 280) and (b) anesthesiologists who are resident in the UK and are members of the Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists (n = 193).

RESULTS

All six attributes studied were statistically significant to both respondent groups, indicating that all attributes were important to respondents. The strength of anesthesiologists and parents' preferences was significantly different for all attributes other than parental presence at induction of anaesthesia.

CONCLUSIONS

Parents and anesthesiologists had a significantly different order of priorities for service attributes.

Postoperative morbidities following dental care under day-stay general anesthesia in intellectually disabled children

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to compare the postoperative morbidities for 24 hours following dental care under day-stay general anesthesia using sevoflurane or halothane in intellectually disabled children.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-six premedicated patients with intellectual disabilities underwent general anesthesia for their dental treatment. They were randomly given anesthesia maintained with sevoflurane (2% to 3%) or halothane (1% to 1.5%) after receiving inhalation induction either with sevoflurane (8%) or halothane (5%) and nitrous oxide in oxygen (50:50). The patients' age, gender, weight, ASA Class, type of dental treatment, and duration of anesthesia and operation were recorded as well as the time required for recovery (Aldrete Scale) and the length of time taken before they were discharged (postanesthetic discharge scoring system) from the hospital. Pain and agitation were recorded using a visual analog scale (0 to 10). Other postoperative morbidities, which include crying, nausea and vomiting, bleeding, and drowsiness, were also noted for 24 hours after the operation.

RESULTS

The most common morbidities during the postoperative 24 hours were agitation and pain, and their occurrence was significantly more common in the sevoflurane group than in the halothane group (P < .05). The recovery time was shorter in the sevoflurane group, but it was not statistically significant. There was no difference between the groups in the discharge time.

CONCLUSIONS

Apart from more postoperative agitation and pain after awakening from sevoflurane, the quality of recovery was similar for both sevoflurane and halothane.

Propofol and halothane versus sevoflurane in paediatric day-case surgery: induction and recovery characteristics

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to compare the induction and recovery characteristics associated with propofol induction and halothane maintenance with sevoflurane anaesthesia in paediatric day surgery.

METHODS

In total, 322 children were assigned randomly to i.v. propofol induction and halothane/nitrous oxide maintenance or sevoflurane/nitrous oxide alone. The patients' age, sex, and type of surgery were recorded, as were the times required for anaesthetic induction, maintenance, recovery and time to discharge home. Postoperative nausea and vomiting, and the incidence of adverse events during induction and recovery were also noted.

RESULTS

No significant differences were detected in age, sex, type of surgery performed or intraoperative opioid administration. Excitatory movement was more common during induction with sevoflurane. The mean time required for induction with propofol was 3.1 min compared with 5 min in the sevoflurane group (P<0.001). The recovery time was shorter in the sevoflurane group compared with propofol/halothane (23.2 vs 26.4 min, P<0.002). The incidence of delirium in recovery was greater in the sevoflurane group (P<0.001). There was no difference between groups in the time spent on the postoperative ward before discharge home. On the postoperative ward the incidence of both nausea and vomiting was significantly higher in the sevoflurane group (P=0.034). Five children were admitted to hospital overnight, none for anaesthetic reasons.

CONCLUSIONS

The increased incidence of adverse events during induction, postoperative nausea and vomiting and postoperative delirium in the sevoflurane group suggests that sevoflurane is not ideal as a sole agent for paediatric day case anaesthesia.