View clinical trials related to Postoperative Morbidity.
Filter by:Post-operative morbidity and mortality is related to many factors related to the patient's condition, the intra-operative period and the optimisation of intra-operative haemodynamic and respiratory parameters. Many studies have looked at the determinants and factors that increase postoperative complications. However, these have been randomised studies looking at one parameter in particular. This analysis would be the first to investigate the determinants of postoperative complications in a large population of patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery. This is a post-hoc analysis of patients included in the OPHIQUE study, whose main objective was to evaluate intraoperative haemodynamic management guided by a marker of tissue hypoperfusion (the respiratory quotient).
This study assessed whether transanal TME in patients with rectal cancer is superior to open, laparoscopic, and robotic TME (abdominal TME (abTME)) regarding oncological outcome, postoperative morbidity and 90-day mortality.
The aim of this study is to compare the effects of a strategy aimed at increasing alveolar recruitment (high PEEP levels adjusted according to driving pressure and recruitment maneuvers) with that of a strategy aimed at minimizing alveolar distension (low PEEP level without recruitment maneuver) on postoperative respiratory failure and mortality in patients receiving low VT ventilation during emergency abdominal surgery.
The primary purpose of the study is to evaluate whether the type of fluid (0.9% saline or 6% Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4) in the context of an individualized goal-directed fluid therapy is associated with a difference in morbidity and mortality within the first 14 days in patients at moderate-to-high risk of postoperative complications after abdominal surgery. Further investigation include the analysis of hemostasis modifications according to the fluid group during the first 7 days after abdominal surgery.
Over 40 million major operative procedures are performed in the US annually and comprise about 40% of healthcare expenditures. Despite decades of research, perioperative mortality and morbidity remain a major healthcare system cost and detriment to long-term quality of life. More than ten percent of patients experience a significant event such as surgical site infection, reoperation, myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolus, or death. Nearly 100,000 patients die after surgery each year. National data demonstrate a 3-fold variation in risk adjusted surgical morbidity and mortality, suggesting many opportunities for improvement in perioperative care. Anesthesiology care demonstrates wide variation in practice. Sometimes, this variation is appropriate because the anesthesiologist is responding to patient comorbidities or procedure specific events. However, even after controlling for patient specific factors, there is a substantial amount of unexplained variation in fundamental elements of anesthesiology care. The same procedure and patient can be performed using completely different anesthetic techniques, hemodynamic management strategies, and medications. This variation in care can lead to a variation in outcome. The use of electronic health records (EHR) with detailed preoperative and intraoperative data allows an automated system to be developed to notify clinicians their compliance to both process of care metrics and outcome metrics. The Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) quality improvement arm is known as Anesthesiology Performance Improvement Reporting Exchange (ASPIRE). Like other Collaborative Quality Initiatives, the primary goal of ASPIRE is to provide hospitals with risk-adjusted feedback on outcome and process of care variation. In addition, ASPIRE creates an active best-practice sharing environment to enable data to spur action. Recent literature has demonstrated that hospital-level feedback may not be adequate to improve performance and clinical outcomes. In addition to hospital level data and feedback, ASPIRE can disseminate provider-specific electronic feedback that may decrease variation in care known to impact complications and cost. The primary aim for this research study on ASPIRE's QI program is to determine if the investigators can change behavior as measured by a provider's compliance to specific performance metrics. The investigators believe that the start of individual provider performance feedback reports to ASPIRE members presents a unique opportunity to research the efficacy of these novel tools. The investigators propose to test the hypothesis that monthly provider specific feedback emails on ASPIRE quality metrics over a period of 9 months improves provider compliance as measured by a either a 10% improvement in the Total Performance Score or by moving from below to above the 90% performance threshold in the Total Performance Score Index. Each provider type (faculty, CRNA, resident/fellow) within a hospital participating in ASPIRE will be individually randomized to either receiving the electronic performance improvement email or not for a total of nine months. No individual at the participating site will see the individualized email compliance reports except for the specific provider. Only an aggregate of the compliance across the entire hospital will be supplied to the chairperson and the quality assurance directors. After the completion of the nine month randomization period, all providers will receive monthly ASPIRE performance improvement emails. The University of Michigan is the coordinating center but also participating in this research on QI project. De-identified patient data will be pulled in aggregate for each provider using the MPOG database. The provider performance for each measure will then be sent from ASPIRE to the randomized care provider via an email. The chairperson and quality assurance directors will only see aggregate data on compliance rates and can NOT identify individual compliance rates. Each participating site will obtain their own institutional IRB to participate in this study.
The primary purpose of the study is to evaluate whether the type of fluid (0.9% saline or 6% Hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.4) in the context of an individualized goal-directed fluid therapy is associated with a difference in morbidity and mortality within the first 14 days in patients at moderate-to-high risk of postoperative complications after abdominal surgery.
The purpose of the study is to determine the influence of preoperative co-morbidity in relation to increased length of stay and postoperative complications in patients receiving fast-track hip or knee replacement.
The proposed study will test the following hypotheses: 1. Pre-operative daily dual supplementation with Juice Plus+ (fruit & vegetable) for 11 weeks will result in reduced post-operative morbidity in terms of quality of life, pain and trismus after 1 week following surgical removal of lower third molars, when compared to placebo. 2. Pre-operative daily dual supplementation with Juice Plus+ (fruit & vegetable) for 11 weeks will reduce serum markers of oxidative stress, following surgical removal of lower third molars, when compared with placebo.