No Effect of Surgical Approach on Discharge Outcomes in Outpatient Total Hip Arthroplasty

Background: The interest in ambulatory total hip arthroplasty (THA) has increased recently due to a national focus on value-based care and improved rapid recovery protocols. Purpose: We sought to determine if surgical approach had an effect on discharge outcomes in outpatient THA. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study examining patients who underwent unilateral THA at a single institution using a standardized perioperative care pathway who were discharged home within 24 hours. In total, we compared 106 patients who underwent THA using the direct anterior approach (ATHA) and 90 patients who underwent THA using the posterior approach (PTHA). Univariate and multivariable analyses were used to compare time to ambulation, length of surgery, readmissions, and 90-day complications. Results:Time to ambulation in the ATHA and PTHA groups was 3.9 hours and 4.1 hours, respectively, and time to discharge was 5.9 hours and 6.0 hours, respectively. Length of surgery was shorter in the ATHA group than in the PTHA group (78 minutes vs 86 minutes, respectively). Complications occurred in 3 patients (3%) in the ATHA group vs 4 patients (4%) in PTHA group. In both groups, early ambulation (within 5 hours) predicted earlier time to discharge. Surgical approach was not associated with time to ambulation or time to discharge on multivariable analysis. Conclusion: In this retrospective study, outpatient THA was feasible in a well-selected population of patients undergoing anterior or posterior approaches. Further study is warranted.

Regional Anaesthesia in Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Pathways – A Quintessential Component

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal, perioperative care pathway designed to achieve early recovery for patients undergoing major surgery. [1] Initially described by Henry Kehlet in 1995 for colonic surgeries, the enhanced recovery pathways have now evolved and are now validated for more than 30 different types of surgery which include but are not limited to emergency laparotomy, neonatal surgeries, and lower segment cesarean sections. [2] Not only is the patient benefited from this by having an enhanced recovery and early discharge from the hospital, the cost of treatment is reduced and also leads to more turnover of patients thereby reducing the waiting list of patients scheduled for various surgeries. [3]

Improving Provision of Preanesthetic Information Through Use of the Digital Conversational Agent “MyAnesth”: Prospective Observational Trial

Background Due to time limitations, the preanesthetic consultation (PAC) is not the best time for patients to integrate information specific to their perioperative care pathway. Objective The main objectives of this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of a digital companion on patients' knowledge of anesthesia and their satisfaction after real-life implementation. Methods We conducted a prospective, monocentric, comparative study using a before-and-after design. In phase 1, a 9-item self-reported anesthesia knowledge test (Delphi method) was administered to patients before and after their PAC (control group: PAC group). In phase 2, the study was repeated immediately after the implementation of a digital conversational agent, MyAnesth (@+PAC group). Patients’ satisfaction and their representations for anesthesia were also assessed using a Likert scale and the Abric method of hierarchized evocation. Results A total of 600 tests were distributed; 205 patients and 98 patients were included in the PAC group and @+PAC group, respectively. Demographic characteristics and mean scores on the 9-point preinformation test (PAC group: 4.2 points, 95% CI 3.9-4.4; @+PAC: 4.3 points, 95% CI 4-4.7; P=.37) were similar in the two groups. The mean score after receiving information was better in the @+PAC group than in the PAC group (6.1 points, 95% CI 5.8-6.4 points versus 5.2 points, 95% CI 5.0-5.4 points, respectively; P<.001), with an added value of 0.7 points (95% CI 0.3-1.1; P<.001). Among the respondents in the @+PAC group, 82% found the information to be clear and appropriate, and 74% found it easily accessible. Before receiving information, the central core of patients’ representations for anesthesia was focused on the fear of being put to sleep and thereafter on caregiver skills and comfort. Conclusions The implementation of our digital conversational agent in addition to the PAC improved patients' knowledge about their perioperative care pathway. This innovative audiovisual support seemed clear, adapted, easily accessible, and reassuring. Future studies should focus on adapting both the content and delivery of a digital conversational agent for the PAC in order to maximize its benefit to patients.

Improving Provision of Preanesthetic Information Through Use of the Digital Conversational Agent “MyAnesth”: Prospective Observational Trial (Preprint)

BACKGROUND Due to time limitations, the preanesthetic consultation (PAC) is not the best time for patients to integrate information specific to their perioperative care pathway. OBJECTIVE The main objectives of this study were to evaluate the effectiveness of a digital companion on patients' knowledge of anesthesia and their satisfaction after real-life implementation. METHODS We conducted a prospective, monocentric, comparative study using a before-and-after design. In phase 1, a 9-item self-reported anesthesia knowledge test (Delphi method) was administered to patients before and after their PAC (control group: PAC group). In phase 2, the study was repeated immediately after the implementation of a digital conversational agent, MyAnesth (@+PAC group). Patients’ satisfaction and their representations for anesthesia were also assessed using a Likert scale and the Abric method of hierarchized evocation. RESULTS A total of 600 tests were distributed; 205 patients and 98 patients were included in the PAC group and @+PAC group, respectively. Demographic characteristics and mean scores on the 9-point preinformation test (PAC group: 4.2 points, 95% CI 3.9-4.4; @+PAC: 4.3 points, 95% CI 4-4.7; <i>P</i>=.37) were similar in the two groups. The mean score after receiving information was better in the @+PAC group than in the PAC group (6.1 points, 95% CI 5.8-6.4 points versus 5.2 points, 95% CI 5.0-5.4 points, respectively; <i>P</i>&lt;.001), with an added value of 0.7 points (95% CI 0.3-1.1; <i>P</i>&lt;.001). Among the respondents in the @+PAC group, 82% found the information to be clear and appropriate, and 74% found it easily accessible. Before receiving information, the central core of patients’ representations for anesthesia was focused on the fear of being put to sleep and thereafter on caregiver skills and comfort. CONCLUSIONS The implementation of our digital conversational agent in addition to the PAC improved patients' knowledge about their perioperative care pathway. This innovative audiovisual support seemed clear, adapted, easily accessible, and reassuring. Future studies should focus on adapting both the content and delivery of a digital conversational agent for the PAC in order to maximize its benefit to patients.

Assessing and preparing patients with medical conditions for major surgery

The assessment of patients before surgery is complex. However, since surgery is offered to increasing numbers of patients with multiple comorbidities, the demand for comprehensive preoperative assessment is expected to increase. Perioperative medicine provides a patient-centred approach from preoperative assessment through to hospital discharge and beyond. Preoperative assessment serves to identify comorbidity that may require optimization before surgery, plan perioperative care, identify a need for a non-standard anaesthetic technique, assess functional reserve, brief patients on the perioperative care pathway, and provide an opportunity to have questions answered. There are a variety of tools for preoperative assessment and recognized approaches to managing patients with existing chronic disease during the perioperative period, but the absence of robust evidence to favour any particular clinical approach is striking.