scholarly journals Patient and Surgeon Perceptions of the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS): A Mixed Methods Analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Bronsert ◽  
Anne Lambert-Kerzner ◽  
William G. Henderson ◽  
Karl E. Hammermeister ◽  
Chisom Atuanya ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Risk assessment is essential to informed decision making in surgery. Preoperative use of the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) providing individualized risk assessment, may enhance informed consent. We assessed patient and provider perceptions of SURPAS as a risk assessment tool. Methods A convergent mixed-methods study assessed SURPAS’s trial implementation, concurrently collecting quantitative and qualitative data, separately analyzing it, and integrating the results. Patients and providers were surveyed and interviewed on their opinion of how SURPAS impacted the preoperative encounter. Relationships between patient risk and patient and provider assessment of SURPAS were examined. Results 197 patients were provided their SURPAS postoperative risk estimates in nine surgeon’s clinics. 98.8% of patients reported they understood their surgical risks very or quite well after exposure to SURPAS; 92.7% reported SURPAS was very helpful or helpful. 83.4% of the time providers reported SURPAS was very or somewhat helpful; 44.7% of the time the providers reported it changed their interaction with the patient and this change was beneficial 94.3% of the time. As patient risk increased, providers reported that SURPAS was increasingly helpful (p<0.0001).Conclusions Patients and providers reported the use of SURPAS helpful and informative during the preoperative risk assessment of patients, thus improving the surgical decision making process. Patients thought that SURPAS was helpful regardless of their risk level, whereas providers thought that SURPAS was more helpful in higher risk patients.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael R. Bronsert ◽  
Anne Lambert-Kerzner ◽  
William G. Henderson ◽  
Karl E. Hammermeister ◽  
Chisom Atuanya ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Risk assessment is essential to informed decision making in surgery. Preoperative use of the Surgical Risk Preoperative Assessment System (SURPAS) providing individualized risk assessment, may enhance informed consent. We assessed patient and provider perceptions of SURPAS as a risk assessment tool.Methods: A convergent mixed-methods study assessed SURPAS’s trial implementation, concurrently collecting quantitative and qualitative data, separately analyzing it, and integrating the results. Patients and providers were surveyed and interviewed on their opinion of how SURPAS impacted the preoperative encounter. Relationships between patient risk and patient and provider assessment of SURPAS were examined.Results: A total of 197 patients were provided their SURPAS postoperative risk estimates in nine surgeon’s clinics. Of the total patients, 98.8% reported they understood their surgical risks very or quite well after exposure to SURPAS; 92.7% reported SURPAS was very helpful or helpful. Providers shared that 83.4% of the time they reported SURPAS was very or somewhat helpful; 44.7% of the time the providers reported it changed their interaction with the patient and this change was beneficial 94.3% of the time. As patient risk increased, providers reported that SURPAS was increasingly helpful (p<0.0001).Conclusions: Patients and providers reported the use of SURPAS helpful and informative during the preoperative risk assessment of patients, thus improving the surgical decision making process. Patients thought that SURPAS was helpful regardless of their risk level, whereas providers thought that SURPAS was more helpful in higher risk patients.


2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (04) ◽  
pp. 448-452
Author(s):  
Tomohiro Uchida ◽  
Noriaki Satake ◽  
Toshimichi Nakaho ◽  
Akira Inoue ◽  
Hidemitsu Saito

AbstractObjectivesThe Bereavement Risk Assessment Tool (BRAT) seems to be useful in identifying those who are likely to suffer from the more severe consequences of bereavement. To date, however, only a few studies have examined bereavement risk using the BRAT. This study investigated bereavement risk in family caregivers of patients with cancer using the Japanese version of the Bereavement Risk Assessment Tool (BRAT-J). We also investigated the relationship of bereavement risk with psychological distress and resilience among caregivers to determine the validity of the BRAT-J.MethodsWe conducted family psychoeducation in the palliative care unit of Tohoku University Hospital with participants who were recruited in this study. Among the participants, 50 family caregivers provided their written informed consent and were included in this study. Participants were assessed using the BRAT-J and completed the Japanese version of the Kessler Psychological Distress Scale (K6) and the Tachikawa Resilience Scale (TRS).ResultsAccording to the BRAT-J, five individuals (10%) were in the high category of bereavement risk (level 4 or 5). We also found that family caregivers of patients experienced many different pressures, such as facing the unknown; their own work; and insufficient financial, practical, or physical resources. These issues are associated with various mental problems. Additionally, the level of bereavement risk was significantly correlated with K6 scores (ρ = 0.30, p = 0.032), and the TRS score (ρ = –0.44, p = 0.001). These correlations confirmed previous findings and that the BRAT-J can be an efficient screening tool for the bereavement risk of family caregivers of patients with cancer.Significance of resultsIt appears that the BRAT-J is useful in predicting the likelihood of difficulties or complications in bereavement for family caregivers and could help to provide support with these issues when needed.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Aaron Bloomstone ◽  
Benjamin T Houseman ◽  
Evora Vicents Sande ◽  
Ann Brantley ◽  
Jessica Curran ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Individual surgical risk prediction tools that inform shared-decision making, strengthen the consent process and support clinical management are considered important tools to enhance patient experience and outcomes. Neither the use of individual pre-surgical risk assessment (ISRA) tools nor the rate of documented individual risk is known. The primary endpoint of this study was the rate of physician documented ISRAs within the records of patients with poor outcomes. Secondary endpoints included the effects of age, sex, race, ASA class, and time and type of surgery on the rate of documented presurgical risk.Methods The records of non-obstetric surgical patients within 22 hospitals in Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska, Nevada, and Wyoming, between January 1 and December 31, 2017 were evaluated. Logistic regression was used to analyze both individual and group effects associated with ISRA documentation.Results 756 of 140,756 inpatient charts met inclusion criteria [0.54%, 95% CI 0.50% to 0.58%]. ISRAs were documented by 16.08% of surgeons [p<0.0001; R-squared=68.23%] and 4.50% of anesthesiologists [p< 0.0001, R-squared 15.38%]. Cardiac surgeons documented ISRAs more frequently than non-cardiac surgeons (25.87% vs 16.15%) [p=0.0086, R-squared=0.970%]. Elective surgical patients were more likely than emergency surgical patients (19.57 vs 12.03%) to have risk documented [p=0.0226, R-squared=0.730%]. Patients over the age of 65 were more likely than patients under the age of 65 to have ISRA documentation (20.31 vs 14.61%) [p=0.0429, R-squared=0.580%].Conclusions The observed rate of documented individual surgical risk assessment in our sample was low. Surgeons were more likely than anesthesiologists to document individual presurgical risk. In-line with the Salzburg Statement on Shared-Decision Making, information regarding surgical risk represents the bedrock of presurgical decision making and informed consent. The rate and quality of risk documentation must be improved.


2016 ◽  
Vol 264 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert A. Meguid ◽  
Michael R. Bronsert ◽  
Elizabeth Juarez-Colunga ◽  
Karl E. Hammermeister ◽  
William G. Henderson

2022 ◽  
Vol 270 ◽  
pp. 394-404
Author(s):  
Adam R. Dyas ◽  
Michael R. Bronsert ◽  
Robert A. Meguid ◽  
Kathryn L. Colborn ◽  
Anne Lambert-Kerzner ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 127-131
Author(s):  
John O'Shea ◽  
Margaret Coleman ◽  
Saad Mahdy ◽  
Mel Corbett ◽  
Ger Curley

Triaging patients into and away from preoperative assessment clinics remains a challenge. Anaesthesia Preoperative Assessment Tool (APAT) is a web application that delivers an online 22 question survey to patients at home, and uses an artificially intelligent algorithm to stratify patient risk and identify the need for non routine preoperative investigation and intervention. We assess APATs accuracy and patient acceptability in this prospective observational study. Patients were recruited at preoperative assessment clinic, where they were assessed by a consultant anaesthetist. Anaesthetist (ASA) grade, need for nonstandard investigation and intervention were recorded (gold standard). Patients were invited to complete an APAT assessment on their PC or smartphone at home, and the results of both assessments compared. 22 patients completed conventional clinical assessment by consultant anaesthetist and online assessment by APAT. APAT score correlates with clinicians ASA grade (rτ=0.6075, p=0.0008). APAT predicts patient risk group (misclassification rate of 0%, Area Under the Curve (AUC)=0.9825). APAT predicts the need for additional investigation (AUC=0.8077) and preoperative intervention (AUC=0.7193). Online assessment was acceptable to 92% of patients. Our findings support the hypothesis that APAT accurately predicts patients perioperative risk and predicts the need for investigation and intervention. Further studies are needed to confirm that APAT may be used to identify ASA 1 and 2 patients who could safely bypass preoperative assessment clinic.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Xiao Liang ◽  
Taiyue Qi ◽  
Zhiyi Jin ◽  
Shaojie Qin ◽  
Pengtao Chen

Constructing a shield tunnel that crosses under a river poses considerable safety risks, and risk assessment is essential for guaranteeing the safety of tunnel construction. This paper studies a risk assessment system for a shield tunnel crossing under a river. Risk identification is performed for the shield tunnel, and the risk factors and indicators are determined. The relationship between the two is determined preliminarily by numerical simulation, the numerical simulation results are verified by field measurements, and a sample set is established based on the numerical simulation results. Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation and a backpropagation neural network are then used to evaluate and analyze the risk level. Finally, the risk assessment system is used to evaluate the risk for Line 5 of the Hangzhou Metro in China. Based on the evaluation results, adjustments to the slurry strength, grouting pressure, and soil chamber pressure are proposed, and the risk is mitigated effectively.


2020 ◽  
Vol 230 (6) ◽  
pp. 1025-1033.e1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brett M. Wiesen ◽  
Michael R. Bronsert ◽  
Davis M. Aasen ◽  
Abhinav B. Singh ◽  
Anne Lambert-Kerzner ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document