Prognostic model to predict postoperative acute kidney injury in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery based on a national prospective observational cohort study.

Background: Acute illness, existing co-morbidities and surgical stress response can all contribute to postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) in patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery. The aim of this study was prospectively to develop a pragmatic prognostic model to stratify patients according to risk of developing AKI after major gastrointestinal surgery. Methods: This prospective multicentre cohort study included consecutive adults undergoing elective or emergency gastrointestinal resection, liver resection or stoma reversal in 2-week blocks over a continuous 3-month period. The primary outcome was the rate of AKI within 7 days of surgery. Bootstrap stability was used to select clinically plausible risk factors into the model. Internal model validation was carried out by bootstrap validation. Results: A total of 4544 patients were included across 173 centres in the UK and Ireland. The overall rate of AKI was 14·2 per cent (646 of 4544) and the 30-day mortality rate was 1·8 per cent (84 of 4544). Stage 1 AKI was significantly associated with 30-day mortality (unadjusted odds ratio 7·61, 95 per cent c.i. 4·49 to 12·90; P < 0·001), with increasing odds of death with each AKI stage. Six variables were selected for inclusion in the prognostic model: age, sex, ASA grade, preoperative estimated glomerular filtration rate, planned open surgery and preoperative use of either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker. Internal validation demonstrated good model discrimination (c-statistic 0·65). Discussion: Following major gastrointestinal surgery, AKI occurred in one in seven patients. This preoperative prognostic model identified patients at high risk of postoperative AKI. Validation in an independent data set is required to ensure generalizability

A qualitative analysis of junior doctors' journeys to preparedness in acute care

Background New doctors are expected to assess and manage acutely deteriorating patients from their first days in the hospital. However, current evidence suggests that medical graduates are not prepared for this. We aimed to explore junior doctors’ first experiences with unwell patients and how they developed preparedness over time. Methods We conducted seven semi-structured interviews with doctors in their first postgraduate year. The interview transcripts underwent inductive thematic analysis using consensual qualitative research approaches. Themes identified were categorised into early experiences of unpreparedness, first experiences of genuine preparedness, and making sense of how they became prepared. Reflection on how participants progressed between the two was facilitated through a sorting and ranking exercise. Results Most participants initially felt unprepared when responding to acutely unwell patients. They described feeling overwhelmed, apprehensive and challenged. Two main challenges involved knowing when to escalate, and feeling expected to perform beyond their level of competency. A lack of acute care exposure at medical school was a common thread. All participants felt prepared to respond to unwell patients three to six months after starting work. Hands-on experience, reflection, simulation and multidisciplinary team-working were consistently ranked as the most useful learning experiences. Conclusion Starting work as a doctor is a challenging time and preparedness to manage an acutely deteriorating patient is a common area of concern. As preparedness in acute care ranks poorly compared to other outcomes, we see this as an important area for improvement. Our findings suggest that undergraduates may lack sufficient opportunities for scaffolded decision making in acute care, and that increasing the intensity of clinical shadowing may improve preparedness and should inform future educational interventions