Dataset Information

Wireless Monitoring Program of Patient-Centered Outcomes and Recovery Before and After Major Abdominal Cancer Surgery.

ABSTRACT:

Importance

A combined subjective and objective wireless monitoring program of patient-centered outcomes can be carried out in patients before and after major abdominal cancer surgery.

Objective

To conduct a proof-of-concept pilot study of a wireless, patient-centered outcomes monitoring program before and after major abdominal cancer surgery.

Design, setting, and participants

In this proof-of-concept pilot study, patients wore wristband pedometers and completed online patient-reported outcome surveys (symptoms and quality of life) 3 to 7 days before surgery, during hospitalization, and up to 2 weeks after discharge. Reminders via email were generated for all moderate to severe scores for symptoms and quality of life. Surgery-related data were collected via electronic medical records, and complications were calculated using the Clavien-Dindo classification. The study was carried out in the inpatient and outpatient surgical oncology unit of one National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center. Eligible patients were scheduled to undergo curative resection for hepatobiliary and gastrointestinal cancers, were English speaking, and were 18 years or older. Twenty participants were enrolled over 4 months. The study dates were April 1, 2015, to July 31, 2016.

Main outcomes and measures

Outcomes included adherence to wearing the pedometer, adherence to completing the surveys (MD Anderson Symptom Inventory and EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system), and satisfaction with the monitoring program.

Results

This study included a final sample of 20 patients (median age, 55.5 years [range, 22-74 years]; 15 [75%] female) with evaluable data. Pedometer adherence (88% [17 of 20] before surgery vs 83% [16 of 20] after discharge) was higher than survey adherence (65% to 75% [13 of 20 and 15 of 20] completed). The median number of daily steps at day 7 was 1689 (19% of daily steps at baseline), which correlated with the Comprehensive Complication Index, for which the median was 15 of 100 (r = -0.64, P < .05). Postdischarge overall symptom severity (2.3 of 10) and symptom interference with activities (3.5 of 10) were mild. Pain (4.4 of 10), fatigue (4.7 of 10), and appetite loss (4.0 of 10) were moderate after surgery. Quality-of-life scores were lowest at discharge (66.6 of 100) but improved at week 2 (73.9 of 100). While patient-reported outcomes returned to baseline at 2 weeks, the number of daily steps was only one-third of preoperative baseline.

Conclusions and relevance

Wireless monitoring of combined subjective and objective patient-centered outcomes can be carried out in the surgical oncology setting. Preoperative and postoperative patient-centered outcomes have the potential of identifying high-risk populations who may need additional interventions to support postoperative functional and symptom recovery.

SUBMITTER: Sun V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5607084 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTechnological advances have enabled continuous monitoring of vital signs (CMVS) by wearable, wireless devices on general hospital wards to facilitate early detection of clinical deterioration, which could potentially improve clinical outcomes. However, evidence on the impact of these CMVS systems on patient outcomes is limited. This research aimed to explore the effect of CMVS on the clinical outcomes in major abdominal surgery patients in a general surgery ward.MethodsA single-centre before-after study was conducted from October 2019 to June 2022. Patients in the intervention group received CMVS in addition to conventional intermittent vital sign monitoring (standard care for control group). With CMVS, heart rate and respiratory rate were measured every 5 min by a patch sensor. Proactive vital signs trends assessments and, when necessary, subsequent nursing activities were performed every nursing shift. The primary outcome of interest was the length of hospital stay (LOS); also, 12 patient-related outcomes were analysed. In the CMVS group, follow-up nursing activities of deviating vital signs trends were described and patient acceptability was measured. Post-hoc subgroup analysis was performed for colorectal and hepatopancreatobiliary surgery.ResultsA total of 908 patients were included (colorectal: n = 650; hepatopancreatobiliary: n = 257). Overall, median LOS was lower in the CMVS group (5.0 versus 5.5 days; P = 0.012), respectively. Post-hoc subgroup analysis showed this reduction in LOS was mostly observed in the colorectal group and not in the hepatopancreatobiliary group. Apart from a decrease in nurse-to-house-officer calls (from 15.3% to 7.7%; P = 0.007), all secondary clinical outcomes were similar in CMVS and control groups. However, a non-significant trend towards less-severe complications and reduced ICU LOS was observed in the CMVS group. In CMVS patients, 109 additional nursing activities were performed and 83% of patients indicated CMVS was acceptable.ConclusionCMVS was associated with a significant reduction in LOS, while other clinical outcomes were unchanged. CMVS triggered additional nursing activities such as extra patient assessments and therapeutic interventions.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough prehabilitation programmes for patients undergoing major intra-abdominal cancer surgery have been shown to improve pre-operative physical fitness, the conclusions regarding any postoperative benefits are inconsistent.ObjectivesThe aim of this study was to evaluate the content of and the outcome measures used in studies of prehabilitation programmes for these patients. It was hypothesised that the content of prehabilitation programmes is often therapeutically invalid, and that the postoperative outcomes assessed are inadequate to evaluate the impact of complications.DesignA systematic review of randomised controlled trials.Data sourcesStudies published between January 2009 and January 2019 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase and PEDro.Eligibility criteriaStudies were included when they investigated the effects of prehabilitation in patients undergoing intra-abdominal surgery for cancer, reported pre-operative and/or postoperative outcome measures and were conducted as a randomised controlled trial. Studies for which the full text was not available were excluded, as were studies of patients undergoing nonabdominal cancer surgery.ResultsEight studies (565 patients) were included. Therapeutic validity was low in five studies. Most studies included low-risk surgical patients and considerable variation was observed between prehabilitation programmes in terms of supervision, training context, frequency, intensity, duration and training type. Objective monitoring of training progression was typically not performed, and most trials did not include nutritional or psychological support. Postoperative complications were reported in seven studies, but no study reported the impact of postoperative complications, nor on long-term postoperative outcomes.ConclusionThe content of prehabilitation programmes was heterogeneous. Studies with a high therapeutic validity found unequivocal evidence that prehabilitation had beneficial effects on postoperative outcomes. Future research should focus on adequate selection and inclusion of high-risk surgical patients and provide personalised and probably multimodal (partly) supervised prehabilitation, with objective monitoring of progress. Measuring the incidence and impact of postoperative complications may contribute to demonstrating the clinical value of prehabilitation.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Recovery after surgery is highly variable. Risk-stratifying patients based on their predicted recovery profile will afford individualized perioperative management strategies. Recently, application of mass cytometry in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty revealed strong immune correlates of surgical recovery in blood samples collected shortly after surgery. However, the ability to interrogate a patient's immune state before surgery and predict recovery is highly desirable in perioperative medicine. METHODS:To evaluate a patient's presurgical immune state, cell-type-specific intracellular signaling responses to ex vivo ligands (lipopolysaccharide, interleukin [IL]-6, IL-10, and IL-2/granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor) were quantified by mass cytometry in presurgical blood samples. Selected ligands modulate signaling processes perturbed by surgery. Twenty-three cell surface and 11 intracellular markers were used for the phenotypic and functional characterization of major immune cell subsets. Evoked immune responses were regressed against patient-centered outcomes, contributing to protracted recovery including functional impairment, postoperative pain, and fatigue. RESULTS:Evoked signaling responses varied significantly and defined patient-specific presurgical immune states. Eighteen signaling responses correlated significantly with surgical recovery parameters (|R| = 0.37 to 0.70; false discovery rate < 0.01). Signaling responses downstream of the toll-like receptor 4 in cluster of differentiation (CD) 14 monocytes were particularly strong correlates, accounting for 50% of observed variance. Immune correlates identified in presurgical blood samples mirrored correlates identified in postsurgical blood samples. CONCLUSIONS:Convergent findings in pre- and postsurgical analyses provide validation of reported immune correlates and suggest a critical role of the toll-like receptor 4 signaling pathway in monocytes for the clinical recovery process. The comprehensive assessment of patients' preoperative immune state is promising for predicting important recovery parameters and may lead to clinical tests using standard flow cytometry.

Project description:BackgroundSurgical site infections (SSI) represent a significant public health problem as the most common nosocomial infection and a leading cause of unplanned hospital readmissions among surgical patients. Many develop following hospital discharge and often go unrecognized by patients. Telemedicine offers the opportunity to leverage the mobile technology to remotely monitor wound recovery in the transitional period between hospital discharge and routine clinic follow-up. However, many existing telemedicine platforms are episodic, replacing routine follow-up, rather than equipped for continued monitoring; they include only low-risk patient populations and those who already have access to and comfort with the necessary technology; and transmit no visual information.ObjectiveDrawing upon the Coleman model for care transitions and the Proctor model for implementation, we propose a protocol of postoperative wound monitoring using smartphone digital images. In this study, we will establish the feasibility of such a program, both for patients and for the clinical care team.MethodsWe will recruit 40 patients or patient/caregiver pairs from our inpatient vascular surgery service. Eligible patients will be English-speaking, 18 years of age or older, and have an incision at least 3 cm in length. Participants will receive a training session, during which they will learn to use the device and the wound monitoring smartphone app. Following hospital discharge, they will submit digital images of their wound and responses to a survey about their recovery for 14 days. Experienced health care providers on the vascular surgery inpatient service will review transmitted data daily and contact patients for any concerning findings.ResultsPrimary outcomes will include participant adherence to the protocol, time required for providers to review submissions, time from submission to provider review, and participant satisfaction. Secondary outcomes will include SSI detection and hospital readmission.ConclusionsHealth systems are increasingly dedicating efforts to transitional care improvement programs. This feasibility trial will confirm whether patients and their caregivers can learn to use a postdischarge wound monitoring smartphone app and will assess patient and provider satisfaction. This protocol will provide preliminary evidence for a shift in the delivery of postdischarge care in a patient-centered and cost-effective manner.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT02735525; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02735525 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6oIvN4Mab).

Project description:BackgroundPreoperative anaemia affects a high proportion of patients undergoing major elective surgery and is associated with poor outcomes. We aimed to test the hypothesis that intravenous iron given to anaemic patients before major open elective abdominal surgery would correct anaemia, reduce the need for blood transfusions, and improve patient outcomes.MethodsIn a double-blind, parallel-group randomised trial, we recruited adult participants identified with anaemia at preoperative hospital visits before elective major open abdominal surgery at 46 UK tertiary care centres. Anaemia was defined as haemoglobin less than 130 g/L for men and 120 g/L for women. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) via a secure web-based service to receive intravenous iron or placebo 10-42 days before surgery. Intravenous iron was administered as a single 1000 mg dose of ferric carboxymaltose in 100 mL normal saline, and placebo was 100 mL normal saline, both given as an infusion over 15 min. Unblinded study personnel prepared and administered the study drug; participants and other clinical and research staff were blinded to treatment allocation. Coprimary endpoints were risk of the composite outcome of blood transfusion or death, and number of blood transfusions from randomisation to 30 days postoperatively. The primary analysis included all randomly assigned patients with data available for the primary endpoints; safety analysis included all randomly assigned patients according to the treatment received. This study is registered, ISRCTN67322816, and is closed to new participants.FindingsOf 487 participants randomly assigned to placebo (n=243) or intravenous iron (n=244) between Jan 6, 2014, and Sept 28, 2018, complete data for the primary endpoints were available for 474 (97%) individuals. Death or blood transfusion occurred in 67 (28%) of the 237 patients in the placebo group and 69 (29%) of the 237 patients in the intravenous iron group (risk ratio 1·03, 95% CI 0·78-1·37; p=0·84). There were 111 blood transfusions in the placebo group and 105 in the intravenous iron group (rate ratio 0·98, 95% CI 0·68-1·43; p=0·93). There were no significant differences between the two groups for any of the prespecified safety endpoints.InterpretationPreoperative intravenous iron was not superior to placebo to reduce need for blood transfusion when administered to patients with anaemia 10-42 days before elective major abdominal surgery.FundingUK National Institute of Health Research Health Technology Assessment Program.