Search

Introduction Millions of patients receive general anaesthesia for surgery annually. Crucial gaps in evidence exist regarding which technique, propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) or inhaled volatile anaesthesia (INVA), yields superior patient experience, safety and outcomes. The aim of this pilot study is to assess the feasibility of conducting a large comparative effectiveness trial assessing patient experiences and outcomes after receiving propofol TIVA or INVA.Methods and analysis This protocol was cocreated by a diverse team, including patient partners with personal experience of TIVA or INVA. The design is a 300-patient, two-centre, randomised, feasibility pilot trial. Patients 18 years of age or older, undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery requiring general anaesthesia with a tracheal tube or laryngeal mask airway will be eligible. Patients will be randomised 1:1 to propofol TIVA or INVA, stratified by centre and procedural complexity. The feasibility endpoints include: (1) proportion of patients approached who agree to participate; (2) proportion of patients who receive their assigned randomised treatment; (3) completeness of outcomes data collection and (4) feasibility of data management procedures. Proportions and 95% CIs will be calculated to assess whether prespecified thresholds are met for the feasibility parameters. If the lower bounds of the 95% CI are above the thresholds of 10% for the proportion of patients agreeing to participate among those approached and 80% for compliance with treatment allocation for each randomised treatment group, this will suggest that our planned pragmatic 12 500-patient comparative effectiveness trial can likely be conducted successfully. Other feasibility outcomes and adverse events will be described.Ethics and dissemination This study is approved by the ethics board at Washington University (IRB# 202205053), serving as the single Institutional Review Board for both participating sites. Recruitment began in September 2022. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, internet-based educational materials and mass media.Trial registration number NCT05346588.

Background: More than four million people die each year in the month following surgery, and many more experience complications such as acute kidney injury. Some of these outcomes may be prevented through early identification of at-risk patients and through intraoperative risk mitigation. Telemedicine has revolutionized the way at-risk patients are identified in critical care, but intraoperative telemedicine services are not widely used in anesthesiology. Clinicians in telemedicine settings may assist with risk stratification and brainstorm risk mitigation strategies while clinicians in the operating room are busy performing other patient care tasks. Machine learning tools may help clinicians in telemedicine settings leverage the abundant electronic health data available in the perioperative period. The primary hypothesis for this study is that anesthesiology clinicians can predict postoperative complications more accurately with machine learning assistance than without machine learning assistance. Methods: This investigation is a sub-study nested within the TECTONICS randomized clinical trial (NCT03923699). As part of TECTONICS, study team members who are anesthesiology clinicians working in a telemedicine setting are currently reviewing ongoing surgical cases and documenting how likely they feel the patient is to experience 30-day in-hospital death or acute kidney injury. For patients who are included in this sub-study, these case reviews will be randomized to be performed with access to a display showing machine learning predictions for the postoperative complications or without access to the display. The accuracy of the predictions will be compared across these two groups. Conclusion: Successful completion of this study will help define the role of machine learning not only for intraoperative telemedicine, but for other risk assessment tasks before, during, and after surgery. Registration: ORACLE is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05042804; registered September 13, 2021.

Introduction: Perioperative morbidity is a public health priority, and surgical volume is increasing rapidly. With advances in technology, there is an opportunity to research the utility of a telemedicine-based control center for anesthesia clinicians that assess risk, diagnoses negative patient trajectories, and implements evidence-based practices. Objectives: The primary objective of this trial is to determine whether an anesthesiology control tower (ACT) prevents clinically relevant adverse postoperative outcomes including 30-day mortality, delirium, respiratory failure, and acute kidney injury. Secondary objectives are to determine whether the ACT improves perioperative quality of care metrics including management of temperature, mean arterial pressure, mean airway pressure with mechanical ventilation, blood glucose, anesthetic concentration, antibiotic redosing, and efficient fresh gas flow. Methods and analysis: We are conducting a single center, randomized, controlled, phase 3 pragmatic clinical trial. A total of 58 operating rooms are randomized daily to receive support from the ACT or not. All adults (eighteen years and older) undergoing surgical procedures in these operating rooms are included and followed until 30 days after their surgery. Clinicians in operating rooms randomized to ACT support receive decision support from clinicians in the ACT. In operating rooms randomized to no intervention, the current standard of anesthesia care is delivered. The intention-to-treat principle will be followed for all analyses. Differences between groups will be presented with 99% confidence intervals; p-values

Introduction: Postoperative delirium and pain are common complications in adults, and are difficult both to prevent and treat. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is prevalent in surgical patients, and has been suggested to be a risk factor for postoperative delirium and pain. OSA also might impact pain perception, and alter pain medication requirements. This protocol describes an observational study, with the primary aim of testing whether OSA is an independent predictor of postoperative complications, focusing on (i) postoperative incident delirium and (ii) acute postoperative pain severity. We secondarily hypothesize that compliance with prescribed treatment for OSA (typically continuous positive airway pressure or CPAP) might decrease the risk of delirium and the severity of pain. Methods and analysis: We will include data from patients who have been enrolled into three prospective studies: ENGAGES, PODCAST, and SATISFY-SOS. All participants underwent general anesthesia for a non-neurosurgical inpatient operation, and had a postoperative hospital stay of at least one day at Barnes Jewish Hospital in St. Louis, Missouri, from February 2013 to May 2018. Patients included in this study have been assessed for postoperative delirium and pain severity as part of the parent studies. In the current study, determination of delirium diagnosis will be based on the Confusion Assessment Method, and the Visual Analogue Pain Scale will be used for pain severity. Data on OSA diagnosis, OSA risk and compliance with treatment will be obtained from the preoperative assessment record. Other variables that are candidate risk factors for delirium and pain will also be extracted from this record. We will use logistic regression to test whether OSA independently predicts postoperative delirium and linear regression to assess OSAs relationship to acute pain severity. We will conduct secondary analyses with subgroups to explore whether these relationships are modified by compliance with OSA treatment.

Background: More than four million people die each year in the month following surgery, and many more experience complications such as acute kidney injury. Some of these outcomes may be prevented through early identification of at-risk patients and through intraoperative risk mitigation. Telemedicine has revolutionized the way at-risk patients are identified in critical care, but intraoperative telemedicine services are not widely used in anesthesiology. Clinicians in telemedicine settings may assist with risk stratification and brainstorm risk mitigation strategies while clinicians in the operating room are busy performing other patient care tasks. Machine learning tools may help clinicians in telemedicine settings leverage the abundant electronic health data available in the perioperative period. The primary hypothesis for this study is that anesthesiology clinicians can predict postoperative complications more accurately with machine learning assistance than without machine learning assistance. Methods: This investigation is a sub-study nested within the TECTONICS randomized clinical trial (NCT03923699). As part of TECTONICS, study team members who are anesthesiology clinicians working in a telemedicine setting are currently reviewing ongoing surgical cases and documenting how likely they feel the patient is to experience 30-day in-hospital death or acute kidney injury. For patients who are included in this sub-study, these case reviews will be randomized to be performed with access to a display showing machine learning predictions for the postoperative complications or without access to the display. The accuracy of the predictions will be compared across these two groups. Conclusion: Successful completion of this study will help define the role of machine learning not only for intraoperative telemedicine, but for other risk assessment tasks before, during, and after surgery. Registration: ORACLE is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05042804; registered September 13, 2021.

Background: More than four million people die each year in the month following surgery, and many more experience complications such as acute kidney injury. Some of these outcomes may be prevented through early identification of at-risk patients and through intraoperative risk mitigation. Telemedicine has revolutionized the way at-risk patients are identified in critical care, but intraoperative telemedicine services are not widely used in anesthesiology. Clinicians in telemedicine settings may assist with risk stratification and brainstorm risk mitigation strategies while clinicians in the operating room are busy performing other patient care tasks. Machine learning tools may help clinicians in telemedicine settings leverage the abundant electronic health data available in the perioperative period. The primary hypothesis for this study is that anesthesiology clinicians can predict postoperative complications more accurately with machine learning assistance than without machine learning assistance. Methods: This investigation is a sub-study nested within the TECTONICS randomized clinical trial (NCT03923699). As part of TECTONICS, study team members who are anesthesiology clinicians working in a telemedicine setting are currently reviewing ongoing surgical cases and documenting how likely they feel the patient is to experience 30-day in-hospital death or acute kidney injury. For patients who are included in this sub-study, these case reviews will be randomized to be performed with access to a display showing machine learning predictions for the postoperative complications or without access to the display. The accuracy of the predictions will be compared across these two groups. Conclusion: Successful completion of this study will help define the role of machine learning not only for intraoperative telemedicine, but for other risk assessment tasks before, during, and after surgery. Registration: ORACLE is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05042804; registered September 13, 2021.

Introduction: Postoperative delirium and pain are common complications in adults, and are difficult both to prevent and treat. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is prevalent in surgical patients, and has been suggested to be a risk factor for postoperative delirium and pain. OSA also might impact pain perception, and alter pain medication requirements. This protocol describes an observational study, with the primary aim of testing whether OSA is an independent predictor of postoperative complications, focusing on (i) postoperative incident delirium and (ii) acute postoperative pain severity. We secondarily hypothesize that compliance with prescribed treatment for OSA (typically continuous positive airway pressure or CPAP) might decrease the risk of delirium and the severity of pain. Methods and analysis: We will include data from patients who have been enrolled into three prospective studies: ENGAGES, PODCAST, and SATISFY-SOS. All participants underwent general anesthesia for a non-neurosurgical inpatient operation, and had a postoperative hospital stay of at least one day at Barnes Jewish Hospital in St. Louis, Missouri, from February 2013 to December 2017. Patients included in this study have been assessed for postoperative delirium and pain severity as part of the parent studies. In the current study, determination of delirium diagnosis will be based on the 3-minute Diagnostic Confusion Assessment Method, and the Visual Analogue Pain Scale will be used for pain severity. Data on OSA diagnosis, OSA risk and compliance with treatment will be obtained from the preoperative assessment record. Other variables that are candidate risk factors for delirium and pain will also be extracted from this record. We will use logistic regression to test whether OSA independently predicts postoperative delirium and linear regression to assess OSAs relationship to acute pain severity. We will conduct secondary analyses with subgroups to explore whether these relationships are modified by compliance with OSA treatment.