Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

UTILITY OF COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY RECONSTRUCTED THORACOLUMBAR SPINAL IMAGING IN BLUNT TRAUMA.

OBJECTIVES: Fractures of the thoracolumbar(TL) spine are common and may cause neurologic damage, pain, and reduced quality of life. CT TL reconstructions from CT chest/abdomen/pelvis(CAP) are used to identify TL fractures, however their benefit over CAP imaging is unclear. We hypothesized that reformatted TL images do not identify additional clinically significant injuries or change outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected 2016-2021 from trauma patients at a level-1 trauma center. All patients ≥18 years old, with TL fractures on CT CAP with/without CT TL reformats were included. Clinically significant TL fractures were defined as requiring operative fixation, brace, or spinal rehabilitation. A binary classification model was created to assess the diagnostic utility of CTCAP compared to CTTL in predicting clinically significant fractures in patients who underwent CT CAP/TL. RESULTS: There were 828 patients with TL fractures, 634 had both CT CAP/CT TL (CAPTL) and 194CTCAP only (CAP). There were 134(16%) clinically significant TL fractures (14(7.2%) CT CAP vs120(18.9%) CT CAPTL,p \u3c 0.001). There were no differences among unstable fractures, fractures on MRI only, mortality, or neurologic deficits on discharge between CAPTL and CAP(p \u3e 0.05). Among clinically significant fractures, CAPTL was not associated with increased MRI utilization, surgery, spinal brace, or spinal cord rehabilitation(p \u3e 0.05). Among clinically insignificant fractures, CAPTL was associated with increased MRIs, LOS, and ICU LOS (p \u3c 0.05). CAPTL was also an independent predictor of increased MRIs (OR5.79,CI2.29-14.65,p \u3c 0.01) and spine consultation (OR2.39,CI1.64-3.67,p \u3c 0.01). More CTCAP/TL were performed in those with clinically significant fractures; however, CTCAP was equivalent to CTTL for detection of fractures(p \u3e 0.05). CONCLUSION: CTCAP alone is sufficient to identify clinically significant TL fractures. While the addition of TL reformatted imaging minimizes missed injuries, it is associated with increased hospital length of stay and MRI resource utilization. Therefore, careful consideration is needed for appropriate CT TL patient selection. STUDY TYPE: Original Research. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV/Diagnostic Test

Fever in the ICU: A Predictor of Mortality in Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients.

PURPOSE: While fever may be a presenting symptom of COVID-19, fever at hospital admission has not been identified as a predictor of mortality. However, hyperthermia during critical illness among ventilated COVID-19 patients in the ICU has not yet been studied. We sought to determine mortality predictors among ventilated COVID-19 ICU patients and we hypothesized that fever in the ICU is predictive of mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 103 ventilated COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between March 14 and May 27, 2020. Final follow-up was June 5, 2020. Patients discharged from the ICU or who died were included. Patients still admitted to the ICU at final follow-up were excluded. RESULTS: 103 patients were included, 40 survived and 63(61.1%) died. Deceased patients were older {66 years[IQR18] vs 62.5[IQR10], ( CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to identify ICU hyperthermia as predictive of mortality in ventilated COVID-19 patients. Additional predictors included male sex, age, and acidosis. With COVID-19 cases increasing, identification of ICU mortality predictors is crucial to improve risk stratification, resource management, and patient outcomes

Screening and intervention for intimate partner violence at trauma centers and emergency departments: an evidence-based systematic review from the Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma

Background Intimate partner violence (IPV) is a serious public health issue with a substantial burden on society. Screening and intervention practices vary widely and there are no standard guidelines. Our objective was to review research on current practices for IPV prevention in emergency departments and trauma centers in the USA and provide evidenced-based recommendations.Methods An evidence-based systematic review of the literature was conducted to address screening and intervention for IPV in adult trauma and emergency department patients. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology was used to determine the quality of evidence. Studies were included if they addressed our prespecified population, intervention, control, and outcomes questions. Case reports, editorials, and abstracts were excluded from review.Results Seven studies met inclusion criteria. All seven were centered around screening for IPV; none addressed interventions when abuse was identified. Screening instruments varied across studies. Although it is unclear if one tool is more accurate than others, significantly more victims were identified when screening protocols were implemented compared with non-standardized approaches to identifying IPV victims.Conclusion Overall, there were very limited data addressing the topic of IPV screening and intervention in emergency medical settings, and the quality of the evidence was low. With likely low risk and a significant potential benefit, we conditionally recommend implementation of a screening protocol to identify victims of IPV in adults treated in the emergency department and trauma centers. Although the purpose of screening would ultimately be to provide resources for victims, no studies that assessed distinct interventions met our inclusion criteria. Therefore, we cannot make specific recommendations related to IPV interventions.PROSPERO registration number CRD42020219517

Prospective Validation of the Emergency Surgery Score in Emergency General Surgery

BACKGROUND The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) was recently developed and retrospectively validated as an accurate mortality risk calculator for emergency general surgery. We sought to prospectively validate ESS, specifically in the high-risk nontrauma emergency laparotomy (EL) patient. METHODS This is an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter prospective observational study. Between April 2018 and June 2019, 19 centers enrolled all adults (aged \u3e18 years) undergoing EL. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were prospectively and systematically collected. Emergency Surgery Score was calculated for each patient and validated using c-statistic methodology by correlating it with three postoperative outcomes: (1) 30-day mortality, (2) 30-day complications (e.g., respiratory/renal failure, infection), and (3) postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) admission. RESULTS A total of 1,649 patients were included. The mean age was 60.5 years, 50.3% were female, and 71.4% were white. The mean ESS was 6, and the most common indication for EL was hollow viscus perforation. The 30-day mortality and complication rates were 14.8% and 53.3%; 57.0% of patients required ICU admission. Emergency Surgery Score gradually and accurately predicted 30-day mortality; 3.5%, 50.0%, and 85.7% of patients with ESS of 3, 12, and 17 died after surgery, respectively, with a c-statistic of 0.84. Similarly, ESS gradually and accurately predicted complications; 21.0%, 57.1%, and 88.9% of patients with ESS of 1, 6, and 13 developed postoperative complications, with a c-statistic of 0.74. Emergency Surgery Score also accurately predicted which patients required intensive care unit admission (c-statistic, 0.80). CONCLUSION This is the first prospective multicenter study to validate ESS as an accurate predictor of outcome in the EL patient. Emergency Surgery Score can prove useful for (1) perioperative patient and family counseling, (2) triaging patients to the intensive care unit, and (3) benchmarking the quality of emergency general surgery care

Prospective Validation of the Emergency Surgery Score in Emergency General Surgery

BACKGROUND The Emergency Surgery Score (ESS) was recently developed and retrospectively validated as an accurate mortality risk calculator for emergency general surgery. We sought to prospectively validate ESS, specifically in the high-risk nontrauma emergency laparotomy (EL) patient. METHODS This is an Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma multicenter prospective observational study. Between April 2018 and June 2019, 19 centers enrolled all adults (aged \u3e18 years) undergoing EL. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative variables were prospectively and systematically collected. Emergency Surgery Score was calculated for each patient and validated using c-statistic methodology by correlating it with three postoperative outcomes: (1) 30-day mortality, (2) 30-day complications (e.g., respiratory/renal failure, infection), and (3) postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) admission. RESULTS A total of 1,649 patients were included. The mean age was 60.5 years, 50.3% were female, and 71.4% were white. The mean ESS was 6, and the most common indication for EL was hollow viscus perforation. The 30-day mortality and complication rates were 14.8% and 53.3%; 57.0% of patients required ICU admission. Emergency Surgery Score gradually and accurately predicted 30-day mortality; 3.5%, 50.0%, and 85.7% of patients with ESS of 3, 12, and 17 died after surgery, respectively, with a c-statistic of 0.84. Similarly, ESS gradually and accurately predicted complications; 21.0%, 57.1%, and 88.9% of patients with ESS of 1, 6, and 13 developed postoperative complications, with a c-statistic of 0.74. Emergency Surgery Score also accurately predicted which patients required intensive care unit admission (c-statistic, 0.80). CONCLUSION This is the first prospective multicenter study to validate ESS as an accurate predictor of outcome in the EL patient. Emergency Surgery Score can prove useful for (1) perioperative patient and family counseling, (2) triaging patients to the intensive care unit, and (3) benchmarking the quality of emergency general surgery care

Unplanned readmission after emergency laparotomy: A post hoc analysis of an EAST multicenter study

Hospital readmission is an important quality-of-care indicator. We sought to examine the rates and predictors of unplanned readmission for the high-risk non-trauma emergency laparotomy patient. This is a post hoc analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study. Between April 2018 and June 2019, a total of 19 centers enrolled all adult patients undergoing emergency laparotomies and systematically collected preoperative, operative, and 30-day postoperative variables. For the purpose of this study, we defined unplanned readmission as a readmission occurring within 30 days from discharge and one that was immediately preceded by an emergency department visit. Patients were excluded if they died during the index admission, were discharged to hospice, or were transferred to other hospitals. Predictors of unplanned readmission were evaluated using a multivariable logistic regression model, adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, laboratory variables, and preoperative acuity of disease variables. A total of 1,347 patients were included, of which 234 (17.4%) had an unplanned readmission. The median patient age was 60 y, 49.4% were male, and 71.4% were white. The most common diagnoses were hollow viscus perforation (28.1%) and small bowel obstruction (24.5%). Predictors of unplanned readmission included patient factors (eg, disseminated cancer [odds ratio: 2.22, confidence interval: 1.35-3.64, P = .002], weight loss >10% in the past 6 months [odds ratio: 1.65, confidence interval: 1.07-2.54, P = .023], dyspnea at baseline [odds ratio: 1.62, confidence interval: 1.06-2.48, P = .026], wound complications [odds ratio: 2.23, confidence interval: 1.55-3.19, P < .001], and discharge to nursing homes [odds ratio: 1.68, confidence interval: 1.02-2.80, P = .044]). Unplanned readmission after emergency laparotomies are common, especially for patients with wound complications or requiring nursing homes. These system factors are potential quality improvement targets to reduce readmissions