Search

Summary: Introduction: Radiotherapy is a challenge in autologous breast reconstruction because of its impact on cutaneous and vascular systems. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is a recognized treatment of radiation-related complications. We aimed to assess the impact of perioperative HBOT on irradiated breast microvascular reconstructive outcomes. Method: We reviewed the medical charts of patients who received radiotherapy and then underwent secondary free autologous breast reconstruction at our institution. Data on demographics, HBOT protocol, intervention characteristics and post-operative complications were collected. Outcomes of the irradiated patients were then compared between the HBOT and non-HBOT groups. Results: Fourteen patients were included (11 unilateral and 2 bilateral deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps and 1 free transverse rectus abdominis muscle flap). Seven patients received HBOT and 7 did not. In the non-HBOT group, there were 1 Clavien–Dindo grade II, 1 Clavien–Dindo grade IIIa and 2 Clavien–Dindo grade IIIb post-operative complications. In the HBOT group, there were 3 Clavien–Dindo grade I, 1 Clavien–Dindo grade IIIa and 2 Clavien–Dindo grade IIIb post-operative complications. The mean operative time was 452.3 minutes (SD ±62.4 minutes) for unilateral cases without HBOT and 457.8 minutes (SD ±102.1 minutes) with HBOT (p=0.913). Mean ischaemia time per flap without HBOT was 109.4 minutes (SD ±51.8 minutes) versus 80.1 minutes (SD ±37.7 minutes) in the HBOT group (p=0.249). Conclusion: This study provides insights into the potential of HBOT treatment in preparing patients with irradiated breast cancer for secondary autologous reconstruction.

Introduction Home-based, virtually-supported care models may represent the most efficient and scalable approach to delivering prehabilitation services. However, virtual approaches to prehabilitation are understudied. This manuscript describes the protocol for an internal pilot randomised controlled trial of a virtually-delivered, multimodal prehabilitation intervention.Methods and analysis We will conduct a pragmatic, individual patient, internal pilot randomised controlled trial of home-based, virtually supported, multimodal prehabilitation compared with standard perioperative care in adults undergoing elective, inpatient thoracic, abdominal, pelvic and vascular surgery at five Canadian hospitals. Participants will be partially blinded; clinicians and outcome assessors will be fully blinded. The intervention consists of 3–12 weeks of a home-based, multimodal (exercise, nutrition and psychosocial support) prehabilitation programme supported through an online platform. The primary feasibility outcomes and their progression targets are (1) monthly recruitment of>6 participants at each centre, (2) intervention adherence of>75%, (3) retention of>90% of participants at the patient-reported primary outcome point of 30-days after surgery and (4) elicitation of patient, clinician and researcher-identified barriers to our pragmatic trial. A sample size of 144 participants will be adequate to estimate recruitment, adherence and retention rates with acceptable precision. All participants will be followed to either death or up to 1 year. As an internal pilot, if no substantive changes to the trial or intervention design are required, pilot participant outcome data will migrate, unanalysed by allocation, to the future full-scale trial.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by Clinical Trials Ontario (Project ID: 4479) and our ethics review board (Protocol Approval #20230399–01T). Results will be disseminated through presentations at scientific conferences, peer-reviewed publications, partner organisations and engagement of social and traditional media.Trial registration number ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT06042491. Protocol, V.1.2, dated 6 June 2024.

Background Although peer-assisted learning is known to be effective for reciprocal learning in medical education, it has been understudied in simulation. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of peer-led compared to instructor-led debriefing for non-technical skill development in simulated crisis scenarios. Methods Sixty-one undergraduate medical students were randomized into the control group (instructor-led debriefing) or an intervention group (peer debriefer or peer debriefee group). After the pre-test simulation, the participants underwent two more simulation scenarios, each followed by a debriefing session. After the second debriefing session, the participants underwent an immediate post-test simulation on the same day and a retention post-test simulation two months later. Non-technical skills for the pre-test, immediate post-test, and retention tests were assessed by two blinded raters using the Ottawa Global Rating Scale (OGRS). Results The participants’ non-technical skill performance significantly improved in all groups from the pre-test to the immediate post-test, with changes in the OGRS scores of 15.0 (95% CI [11.4, 18.7]) in the instructor-led group, 15.3 (11.5, 19.0) in the peer-debriefer group, and 17.6 (13.9, 21.4) in the peer-debriefee group. No significant differences in performance were found, after adjusting for the year of medical school training, among debriefing modalities (P = 0.147) or between the immediate post-test and retention test (P = 0.358). Conclusions Peer-led debriefing was as effective as instructor-led debriefing at improving undergraduate medical students’ non-technical skill performance in simulated crisis situations. Peer debriefers also improved their simulated clinical skills. The peer debriefing model is a feasible alternative to the traditional, costlier instructor model.

Abstract Background Healthcare curricula need summative assessments relevant to and representative of clinical situations to best select and train learners. Simulation provides multiple benefits with a growing literature base proving its utility for training in a formative context. Advancing to the next step, “the use of simulation for summative assessment” requires rigorous and evidence-based development because any summative assessment is high stakes for participants, trainers, and programs. The first step of this process is to identify the baseline from which we can start. Methods First, using a modified nominal group technique, a task force of 34 panelists defined topics to clarify the why, how, what, when, and who for using simulation-based summative assessment (SBSA). Second, each topic was explored by a group of panelists based on state-of-the-art literature reviews technique with a snowball method to identify further references. Our goal was to identify current knowledge and potential recommendations for future directions. Results were cross-checked among groups and reviewed by an independent expert committee. Results Seven topics were selected by the task force: “What can be assessed in simulation?”, “Assessment tools for SBSA”, “Consequences of undergoing the SBSA process”, “Scenarios for SBSA”, “Debriefing, video, and research for SBSA”, “Trainers for SBSA”, and “Implementation of SBSA in healthcare”. Together, these seven explorations provide an overview of what is known and can be done with relative certainty, and what is unknown and probably needs further investigation. Based on this work, we highlighted the trustworthiness of different summative assessment-related conclusions, the remaining important problems and questions, and their consequences for participants and institutions of how SBSA is conducted. Conclusion Our results identified among the seven topics one area with robust evidence in the literature (“What can be assessed in simulation?”), three areas with evidence that require guidance by expert opinion (“Assessment tools for SBSA”, “Scenarios for SBSA”, “Implementation of SBSA in healthcare”), and three areas with weak or emerging evidence (“Consequences of undergoing the SBSA process”, “Debriefing for SBSA”, “Trainers for SBSA”). Using SBSA holds much promise, with increasing demand for this application. Due to the important stakes involved, it must be rigorously conducted and supervised. Guidelines for good practice should be formalized to help with conduct and implementation. We believe this baseline can direct future investigation and the development of guidelines.

Plain English summary Although surgery is one of the most common patient experiences, patients have not been engaged in surgical safety research. Patients were engaged as patient advisors in the use of the Operating Room Black Box® at The Ottawa Hospital. The Operating Room Black Box® is a tool that is used in the operating room (OR) which captures audio, video, patient vital signs and other information that are analyzed for research purposes. The aim of the OR Black Box® is to learn from experience and improve practice and care. Patient advisors influenced the nature of the activities undertaken, co-developed the communication materials for patients, evaluated patient engagement practices, and disseminated the research results. These patient engagement activities are an important first step in engaging patients in surgical safety research.

Background: Teamwork is a critical competency in high-risk settings like the operating room (OR). While conventional approaches focus on describing and learning from negative performance, there may be value in learning from high-performing behaviour, particularly in specialties where serious safety events are relatively rare. This study aimed to explore both the positive and negative use of non-technical skills by anesthesia practitioners in the OR and situate them within the clinical OR context. Methods: This study employed a prospective observational design. Following research ethics approval, a sample of surgical cases in a tertiary hospital were recorded using the OR Black Box®. Data related to surgical phase timing, non-technical skills, team factors, and environmental factors were identified by analysts according to a modified Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model. We performed descriptive statistics and qualitative description of these observations. Results: We observed 25 surgical cases capturing 242 instances of positive non-technical skills among anesthesiologists in the operating room and 9 instances of negative demonstrations. Situational awareness was most frequently (n = 160) observed, followed by communication and teamwork skills (n = 82), and were most often demonstrated in the context of potential environmental distractions (e.g., doors opening, unnecessary interruptions). The least common category of positive non-technical skills observed was leadership (n = 3). Conclusions: Our findings show anesthesiologists are doing a lot “right” and there may be many opportunities for learning from positive practice in the clinical setting. These findings can inform future work to better understand and standardize best practices for non-technical performance in anesthesia.

Introduction: Booster sessions can improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skill retention among healthcare providers; however, the optimal timing of these sessions is unknown. This study aimed to explore differences in skill retention based on booster session timing. Methods: After ethics approval, healthcare providers who completed an initial CPR training course were randomly assigned to either an early booster, late booster, or no booster group. Participants’ mean resuscitation scores, time to initiate compressions, and time to successfully provide defibrillation were assessed immediately post-course and four months later using linear mixed models. Results: Seventy-three healthcare professionals were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences by randomization in the immediate post-test (9.7, 9.2, 8.9) or retention test (10.2, 9.8, and 9.5) resuscitation scores. No significant effects were observed for time to compression. Post-test time to defibrillation (mean ± SE: 112.8 ± 3.0 sec) was significantly faster compared to retention (mean ± SE: 120.4 ± 2.7 sec) (p = 0.04); however, the effect did not vary by randomization. Conclusion: No difference was observed in resuscitation skill retention between the early, late, and no booster groups. More research is needed to determine the aspects of a booster session beyond timing that contribute to skill retention.

In light of the COVID-19 public health restrictions, the use of telemedicine has been on the rise. This care delivery model is valued for its potential to increase care access while providing safe care. However, it changes the way patients and providers interact. Communication during video consultations requires embodied engagement to compensate for the physical distance. This study aimed to identify patient-provider communication challenges during video consultations and assess the tools developed to support patient-provider communication according to the published literature from 2019 to 2022. Searches of eight databases (Medline (Ovid), PubMed, ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health, CINAHL, Web of Science, Scopus, PsychInfo, and Social Services Abstracts), and a Google search for grey literature were conducted. Nineteen articles met inclusion criteria. Findings show that patients and providers share the same concerns, such as a lack of trust relating to physical distance, the ability to establish a meaningful relationship, and a lack of confidence in clinical assessment. The available tools, however, are based on guidelines that are difficult to adapt to the diversity of interaction contexts. There is a need for tools that consider the complexity of patient-provider communication in order to address the challenges stemming from the lack of trust in the context of video consultations. These findings can inform strategies for effective patient-provider communication during video consultations to improve the quality of care and optimize outcomes in this context.

Physician wellness is critical for patient safety and quality of care. Coaching has been successfully and widely applied across many industries to enhance well-being but has only recently been considered for physicians. This review aimed to summarize the existing evidence on the effect of coaching by trained coaches on physician well-being, distress and burnout. MEDLINE, Embase, ERIC, PsycINFO and Web of Science were searched without language restrictions to December 21, 2022. Studies of any design were included if they involved physicians of any specialty undergoing coaching by trained coaches and assessed at least one measure along the wellness continuum. Pairs of independent reviewers determined reference eligibility. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tools for Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) and for Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I). Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity in study design and outcome measures as well as inconsistent reporting. The search retrieved 2531 references, of which 14 were included (5 RCTs, 2 non-randomized controlled studies, 4 before-and-after studies, 2 mixed-methods studies, 1 qualitative study). There were 1099 participants across all included studies. Risk of bias was moderate or serious for non-RCTs, while the 5 RCTs were of lower risk. All quantitative studies reported effectiveness of coaching for at least one outcome assessed. The included qualitative study reported a perceived positive impact of coaching by participants. Evidence from available RCTs suggests coaching for physicians can improve well-being and reduce distress/burnout. Non-randomized interventional studies have similar findings but face many limitations. Consistent reporting and standardized outcome measures are needed.

Abstract Background Despite substantial implications for healthcare provider practice and patient outcomes, gender has yet to be systematically explored with regard to interprofessional operating room (OR) teamwork. We aimed to explore and describe how gender and additional social identity factors shape experiences and perceptions of teamwork in the OR. Methods This study was a qualitative secondary analysis of semi-structured interviews with OR team members conducted between November 2018 and July 2019. Participants were recruited across hospitals in Ontario, Canada. We conducted both purposive and snowball sampling until data saturation was reached. Transcripts were analyzed thematically by two independent research team members, moving from open to axial coding. Results Sixty-six interviews of OR healthcare professionals were completed: anesthesia (n=17), nursing (n=19), perfusion (n=2), and surgery (n=26). Traditional gender roles, norms, and stereotypes were perceived and experienced by both women and men, but with different consequences. Both women and men participants described challenges that women face in the OR, such as being perceived negatively for displaying leadership behaviours. Participants also reported that interactions and behaviours vary depending on the team gender composition, and that other social identities, such as age and race, often interact with gender. Nevertheless, participants indicated a belief that the influence of gender in the OR may be modified. Conclusions The highly gendered reality of the OR creates an environment conducive to breakdowns in communuication and patient safety risks in addition to diminishing team morale, psychological safety, and provider well-being. Consequently, until teamwork interventions adequately account for gender, they are unlikely to be optimally effective or sustainable.

Abstract Background Evidence suggests that there are substantial inconsistencies in the practice of anesthesia. There has not yet been a comprehensive summary of the anesthesia literature that can guide future knowledge translation interventions to move evidence into practice. As the first step toward identifying the most promising interventions for systematic implementation in anesthesia practice, this scoping review of multicentre RCTs aimed to explore and map the existing literature investigating perioperative anesthesia-related interventions and clinical patient outcomes. Methods Multicenter randomized controlled trials were eligible for inclusion if they involved a tested anesthesia-related intervention administered to adult surgical patients (≥ 16 years old), with a control group receiving either another anesthesia intervention or no intervention at all. The electronic databases Embase (via OVID), MEDLINE, and MEDLINE in Process (via OVID), and Cochrane Central Register of Control Trials (CENTRAL) were searched from inception to February 26, 2021. Studies were screened and data were extracted by pairs of independent reviewers in duplicate with disagreements resolved through consensus or a third reviewer. Data were summarized narratively. Results We included 638 multicentre randomized controlled trials (n patients = 615,907) that met the eligibility criteria. The most commonly identified anesthesia-related intervention theme across all studies was pharmacotherapy (n studies = 361 [56.6%]; n patients = 244,610 [39.7%]), followed by anesthetic technique (n studies = 80 [12.5%], n patients = 48,455 [7.9%]). Interventions were most often implemented intraoperatively (n studies = 233 [36.5%]; n patients = 175,974 [28.6%]). Studies typically involved multiple types of surgeries (n studies = 187 [29.2%]; n patients = 206 667 [33.5%]), followed by general surgery only (n studies = 115 [18.1%]; n patients = 201,028 [32.6%]) and orthopedic surgery only (n studies = 94 [14.7%]; n patients = 34,575 [5.6%]). Functional status was the most commonly investigated outcome (n studies = 272), followed by patient experience (n studies = 168), and mortality (n studies = 153). Conclusions This scoping review provides a map of multicenter RCTs in anesthesia which can be used to optimize future research endeavors in the field. Specifically, we have identified key knowledge gaps in anesthesia that require further systematic assessment, as well as areas where additional research would likely not add value. These findings provide the foundation for streamlining knowledge translation in anesthesia in order to reduce practice variation and enhance patient outcomes.

Le partage de commentaires formatifs est inhérent au processus de supervision et l'acceptation de la rétroaction par les apprenants est une étape essentielle à l'apprentissage. Cependant, recevoir des commentaires du superviseur suscite des émotions et les accepter n'est pas facile. Plusieurs recommandations guident les superviseurs sur la façon de partager leurs observations aux apprenants et toutes soulignent l’importance d’encourager l'apprenant à interagir de façon active au processus de rétroaction. Bien que des études dénotent l’effet positif d’informer et de former les apprenants sur la rétroaction, peu s’attardent à les outiller à mieux réagir à la rétroaction. Fondés sur les observations de superviseurs expérimentés, nous proposons un modèle cognitivo-comportemental qui vise à guider les apprenants à aborder la rétroaction avec un état d'esprit de croissance personnelle associé à la position d’apprentissage. Sous le registre de l’acquisition d’une compétence personnelle destinée à mieux accepter les commentaires, le modèle présente un ensemble interdépendant d’attitudes et de comportements destiné à faciliter la gestion des émotions, l’auto-réflexion et l’engagement dans le processus de rétroaction nécessaires à l’apprentissage et à l’acquisition de compétences. L’acronyme H.O.T.E. rappelle aux étudiants les quatre éléments essentiels du modèle : l'humilité, l'ouverture d'esprit, la ténacité et l'explicitation. S’inspirant du courant de la psychologie positive, chaque élément est défini et justifié par des concepts théoriques connus. Pour mieux assimiler les composantes du modèle, l’utilisation de dialogue intérieur est retenue pour faciliter l’entrainement et l’adoption des comportements. L’essence du modèle est discutée à la lumière de la littéracie en rétroaction dédiée aux apprenants.

Introduction Frailty is a strong predictor of adverse postoperative outcomes. Prehabilitation may improve outcomes after surgery for older people with frailty by addressing physical and physiologic deficits. The objective of this trial is to evaluate the efficacy of home-based multimodal prehabilitation in decreasing patient-reported disability and postoperative complications in older people with frailty having major surgery.Methods and analysis We will conduct a multicentre, randomised controlled trial of home-based prehabilitation versus standard care among consenting patients >60 years with frailty (Clinical Frailty Scale>4) having elective inpatient major non-cardiac, non-neurologic or non-orthopaedic surgery. Patients will be partially blinded; clinicians and outcome assessors will be fully blinded. The intervention consists of >3 weeks of prehabilitation (exercise (strength, aerobic and stretching) and nutrition (advice and protein supplementation)). The study has two primary outcomes: in-hospital complications and patient-reported disability 30 days after surgery. Secondary outcomes include survival, lower limb function, quality of life and resource utilisation. A sample size of 750 participants (375 per arm) provides >90% power to detect a minimally important absolute difference of 8 on the 100-point patient-reported disability scale and a 25% relative risk reduction in complications, using a two-sided alpha value of 0.025 to account for the two primary outcomes. Analyses will follow intention to treat principles for all randomised participants. All participants will be followed to either death or up to 1 year.Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval has been granted by Clinical Trials Ontario (Project ID: 1785) and our ethics review board (Protocol Approval #20190409-01T). Results will be disseminated through presentation at scientific conferences, through peer-reviewed publication, stakeholder organisations and engagement of social and traditional media.Trial registration number NCT04221295.

Sex and gender, among other equity-related characteristics, influence the process of care and patients’ outcomes. Currently, the extent to which these characteristics are considered in the anesthesia literature remains unknown. This study assesses their incorporation in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on anesthesia-related interventions, for both patients and healthcare providers. This is a cross-sectional analysis using an existing dataset derived from the anesthesia literature. The dataset originated from a scoping review searching MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews. RCTs investigating the effect of anesthesia-related interventions on mortality for adults undergoing surgery were included. Equity outcome measures were recorded for both patients and providers and assessed for inclusion in the study design, reporting of results, and analysis of intervention effects. Three-hundred sixty-one RCTs (n = 144,674) were included. Most RCTs (91%) reported patient sex/gender, with 58% of patients identified as male. There were 139 studies (39%), where 70% or more of the sample was male, compared to just 14 studies (4%), where 70% or more of the sample was female. Only 10 studies (3%) analyzed results by patient sex/gender, with one reporting a significant effect. There was substantial variation in how age was reported, although nearly all studies (98%) reported some measure of age. For healthcare providers, equity-related information was never available. Better consideration of sex/gender and additional health equity parameters for both patients and providers in RCTs is needed to improve evidence quality, and ultimately, patient care and outcome.

Skill retention after neonatal resuscitation training is poor. A distributed learning strategy – where learning is spread over multiple sessions – can improve retention of declarative memory (facts & knowledge). Session timings are critical – maximal retention occurs when a refresher session is scheduled at 10-30% of the time between initial training and test. We hypothesized this also holds true for neonatal resuscitation, a complex skill set requiring both declarative and procedural memory. We conducted a prospective, single-blinded randomized-controlled trial. University of Ottawa residents were recruited to training in neonatal resuscitation, with a high-fidelity simulated pre-test, immediate post-tests, and a retention test at 4 months. After training, they were randomized to either a refresher session at 3 weeks (18% of interval) or at 2 months (50%). Technical and non-technical skills were scored using validated checklists, knowledge with standardized questions. There was no difference between groups prior to the retention test. The early refresher group demonstrated significantly improved technical (mean ± 95% CI: 22.4 ± 1.3 v 18.2 ± 2.5, p = 0.02) and non-technical (31.0 ± 0.9 v 25.6 ± 3.1, p = 0.03) skill scores in the retention post-test compared to the late group. No difference was seen with knowledge scores. We conclude that both technical and non-technical aspects of neonatal resuscitation performance can benefit from an early refresher session. Session timings are critical and should be tailored to the desired length of skill retention. Findings may be generalizable to other interventions that depend on mixed types of memory.

BackgroundEffective teamwork is critical for safe, high-quality care in the operating room (OR); however, teamwork interventions have not consistently resulted in the expected gains for patient safety or surgical culture. In order to optimize OR teamwork in a targeted and evidence-based manner, it is first necessary to conduct a comprehensive, theory-informed assessment of barriers and enablers from an interprofessional perspective.MethodsThis qualitative study was informed by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Volunteer, purposive and snowball sampling were conducted primarily across four sites in Ontario, Canada and continued until saturation was reached. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and de-identified. Directed content analysis was conducted in duplicate using the TDF as the initial coding framework. Codes were then refined whereby similar codes were grouped into larger categories of meaning within each TDF domain, resulting in a list of domain-specific barriers and enablers.ResultsA total of 66 OR healthcare professionals participated in the study (19 Registered Nurses, two Registered Practical Nurses, 17 anaesthesiologists, 26 surgeons, two perfusionists). The most frequently identified teamwork enablers included people management, shared definition of teamwork, communication strategies, positive emotions, familiarity with team members, and alignment of teamwork with professional role. The most frequently identified teamwork barriers included others' personalities, gender, hierarchies, resource issues, lack of knowledge of best practices for teamwork, negative emotions, conflicting norms and perceptions across professions, being unfamiliar with team members, and on-call/night shifts.ConclusionsWe identified key factors influencing OR teamwork from an interprofessional perspective using a theoretically informed and systematic approach. Our findings reveal important targets for future interventions and may ultimately increase their effectiveness. Specifically, achieving optimal teamwork in the OR may require a multi-level intervention that addresses individual, team and systems-level factors with particular attention to complex social and professional hierarchies.

Objectives This systematic review aimed to assess the role of physician’s sex and gender in relation to processes of care and/or clinical outcomes within the context of cardiac operative care.Design A systematic review.Data sources Searches were conducted in PsycINFO, Embase and Medline from inception to 6 September 2018. The reference lists of relevant systematic reviews and included studies were also searched.Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Quantitative studies of any design were included if they were published in English or French, involved patients of any age undergoing a cardiac surgical procedure and specifically assessed differences in processes of care or clinical patient outcomes by physician’s sex or gender. Studies were screened in duplicate by two pairs of independent reviewers.Outcome measures Processes of care, patient morbidity and patient mortality.Results The search yielded 2095 publications after duplicate removal, of which two were ultimately included. These studies involved various types of surgery, including cardiac. One study found that patients treated by female surgeons compared with male surgeons had a lower 30-day mortality. The other study, however, found no differences in patient outcomes by surgeon’s sex. There were no studies that investigated anaesthesiologist’s sex/gender. There were also no studies investing physician’s sex or gender exclusively in the cardiac operating room.Conclusions The limited data surrounding the impact of physician’s sex/gender on the outcomes of cardiac surgery inhibits drawing a robust conclusion at this time. Results highlight the need for primary research to determine how these factors may influence cardiac operative practice, in order to optimise provider’s performance and improve outcomes in this high-risk patient group.

Abstract Background With over 230 million surgical procedures performed annually worldwide, better application of evidence in anesthesia and perioperative medicine may reduce widespread variation in clinical practice and improve patient care. However, a comprehensive summary of the complete available evidence has yet to be conducted. This scoping review aims to map the existing literature investigating perioperative anesthesia interventions and their potential impact on patient mortality, to inform future knowledge translation and ultimately improve perioperative clinical practice. Methods Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library databases from inception to March 2015. Study inclusion criteria were adult patients, surgical procedures requiring anesthesia, perioperative intervention conducted/organized by a professional with training in anesthesia, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and patient mortality as an outcome. Studies were screened for inclusion, and data was extracted in duplicate by pairs of independent reviewers. Data were extracted, tabulated, and reported thematically. Results Among the 10,505 publications identified, 369 RCTs (n = 147,326 patients) met the eligibility criteria. While 15 intervention themes were identified, only 7 themes (39 studies) had a significant impact on mortality: pharmacotherapy (n = 23), nutritional (n = 3), transfusion (n = 4), ventilation (n = 5), glucose control (n = 1), medical device (n = 2), and dialysis (n = 1). Conclusions By mapping intervention themes, this scoping review has identified areas requiring further systematic investigation given their potential value for reducing patient mortality as well as areas where continued investment may not be cost-effective given limited evidence for improving survival. This is a key starting point for future knowledge translation to optimize anesthesia practice.

Background Systematically observing clinical performance in the operating room (OR) to support patient safety initiatives faces numerous logistical and methodological challenges. These may be solved by new audio-video recording technologies like the OR Black Box, which is a tool similar to black boxes in aviation. This study aimed to identify barriers and enablers that may influence patients’, clinicians’ and senior leadership team members’ support of the OR Black Box in order to guide its future implementation.Methods Patients, clinicians and senior leadership team members were recruited to participate in semistructured interviews informed by the theoretical domains framework (TDF) to identify factors relevant to planning OR Black Box implementation. Deidentified interview transcripts were analysed in duplicate following a TDF coding structure.Results Data saturation was achieved at 15 patients, 17 clinicians and 9 senior leadership team members. Seven domains were relevant for patients, nine for clinicians and four for senior leadership. Knowledge and Beliefs about consequences were barriers and enablers for all three groups. Memory, attention and decision processes and Social influences were enablers for both clinicians and senior leadership. Environmental context and resources, Emotion and Behavioural regulation were found to be barriers and enablers for both clinicians and patients. Social/professional role and identity and Reinforcement were enablers for patients only and Optimism and Intentions were barriers and enablers to clinicians.Conclusions While most stakeholders were supportive of the OR Black Box, we identified many key areas that need to be addressed during its implementation. It is critical to ensure all stakeholders have adequate and accurate information about the OR Black Box system and research goals, and that the OR Black Box is positioned as a patient safety initiative for learning from and improving practice.

Poor reporting quality may contribute to irreproducibility of results and failed 'bench-to-bedside' translation. Consequently, guidelines have been developed to improve the complete and transparent reporting of in vivo preclinical studies. To examine the impact of such guidelines on core methodological and analytical reporting items in the preclinical anesthesiology literature, we sampled a cohort of studies. Preclinical in vivo studies published in Anesthesiology, Anesthesia & Analgesia, Anaesthesia, and the British Journal of Anaesthesia (2008-2009, 2014-2016) were identified. Data was extracted independently and in duplicate. Reporting completeness was assessed using the National Institutes of Health Principles and Guidelines for Reporting Preclinical Research. Risk ratios were used for comparative analyses. Of 7615 screened articles, 604 met our inclusion criteria and included experiments reporting on 52 490 animals. The most common topic of investigation was pain and analgesia (30%), rodents were most frequently used (77%), and studies were most commonly conducted in the United States (36%). Use of preclinical reporting guidelines was listed in 10% of applicable articles. A minority of studies fully reported on replicates (0.3%), randomization (10%), blinding (12%), sample-size estimation (3%), and inclusion/exclusion criteria (5%). Statistics were well reported (81%). Comparative analysis demonstrated few differences in reporting rigor between journals, including those that endorsed reporting guidelines. Principal items of study design were infrequently reported, with few differences between journals. Methods to improve implementation and adherence to community-based reporting guidelines may be necessary to increase transparent and consistent reporting in the preclinical anesthesiology literature.

Purpose: In July 2015, the University of Ottawa introduced a competency-based medical education (CBME) postgraduate program for anesthesia. Prior to program implementation, this study aimed to identify Canadian anesthesiology program directors perceptions of CBME and residents’ opinion on how the program should be designed and perceived consequences of CBME. Methods: This two-phase, qualitative study included semi-structured interviews with Canadian anesthesia program directors (Phase I) and a focus group interview with residents enrolled in the University of Ottawa time-based anesthesia program (Phase II). Both phases sought to gauge participant’s perceptions of CBME. Interviews were recorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analyzed. Results: Data was combined to protect anonymity of the six participants (three program directors and three residents). Participants spoke about the perceived advantages of CBME, the need to establish definitions, and challenges to a CBME program highlighting logistical factors, implications for trainees and the role assessment plays in CBME. Conclusion: These findings will inform CBME implementation strategies in anesthesia programs across the country, and may assist other residency programs in the design of their programs. Furthermore, our findings may help identify potential challenges and issues that other postgraduate specialties may face as they transition to a CBME model.

Purpose High-fidelity simulation training is effective for learning crisis resource management (CRM) skills, but cost is a major barrier to implementing high-fidelity simulation training into the curriculum. The aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of self-debriefing and traditional instructor debriefing in CRM training programs and to calculate the minimum willingness-to-pay (WTP) value when one debriefing type becomes more cost-effective than the other. Methods This study used previous data from a randomized controlled trial involving 50 anesthesiology residents in Canada. Each participant managed a pretest crisis scenario. Participants who were randomized to self-debrief used the video of their pretest scenario with no instructor present during their debriefing. Participants from the control group were debriefed by a trained instructor using the video of their pretest scenario. Participants individually managed a post-test simulated crisis scenario. We compared the cost and effectiveness of self-debriefing versus instructor debriefing using net benefit regression. The cost-effectiveness estimate was reported as the incremental net benefit and the uncertainty was presented using a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. Results Self-debriefing costs less than instructor debriefing. As the WTP increased, the probability that self-debriefing would be cost-effective decreased. With a WTP ≤Can$200, the self-debriefing program was cost-effective. However, when effectiveness was priced higher than cost-savings and with a WTP >Can$300, instructor debriefing was the preferred alternative. Conclusion With a lower WTP (≤Can$200), self-debriefing was cost-effective in CRM simulation training when compared to instructor debriefing. This study provides evidence regarding cost-effectiveness that will inform decision-makers and clinical educators in their decision-making process, and may help to optimize resource allocation in education.

Background: The prevalence of coronary artery disease (CAD) with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) is rising, but the optimal treatment remains unclear. The present study aims to investigate the impact of revascularization (coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)) and medical therapy (MT) on LVEF recovery in patients with CAD and LVEF ≤ 40%. Methods: All clinical studies which reported LVEF in patients with CAD and LVEF ≤ 40% undergoing either revascularization or MT were included. A systematic literature search up to May 11, 2017 was performed on MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library in Ovid. Studies were assessed for eligibility and data were extracted by independent reviewers in duplicate with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Bias assessment was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Random effect meta-analysis was performed on included studies. The primary outcome was change in LVEF after intervention as compared to baseline. Results: 83 cohort studies with a total of 7,157 patients were included. We observed a statistically significant increase in LVEF following revascularization with CABG (MD 7.76; 95% CI: 6.81 to 8.70; pI 2=99%) and PCI (MD 6.70; 95% CI: 4.71 to 8.70; pI 2=94%) but not after MT (MD 4.06; 95% CI: -2.12 to 10.24; p=0.20; I 2=98%). Conclusion: In patients with CAD and LVEF ≤ 40%, revascularization leads to LVEF recovery as compared to MT. There is continued need for RCT level evidence to enable optimization of treatment selection in this difficult population.