Conectar
Millions of patients receive general anaesthesia every year with either propofol total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) or inhaled volatile anaesthesia (INVA). It is currently unknown which of these techniques is superior in relation to patient experience, safety and clinical outcomes. The primary aims of this trial are to determine (1) whether patients undergoing (a) major inpatient surgery, (b) minor inpatient surgery or (c) outpatient surgery have a superior quality of recovery after INVA or TIVA and (2) whether TIVA confers no more than a small (0.2%) increased risk of definite intraoperative awareness than INVA.
This protocol was co-created by a diverse team, including patient partners with personal experience of TIVA or INVA. The design is a 13 000-patient, multicentre, patient-blinded, randomised, comparative effectiveness 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 one of two anaesthetic approaches, TIVA or INVA, using minimisation. The primary effectiveness endpoints are Quality of Recovery-15 (QOR-15) score on postoperative day (POD) 1 in patients undergoing (1) major inpatient surgery, (2) minor inpatient surgery or (3) outpatient surgery, and the primary safety endpoint is the incidence of unintended definite intraoperative awareness with recall in all patients, assessed on POD1 or POD30. Secondary endpoints include QOR-15 score on POD0, POD2 and POD7; incidence of delirium on POD0 and POD1; functional status on POD30 and POD90; health-related quality of life on POD30, POD90, POD180 and POD365; days alive and at home at POD30; patient satisfaction with anaesthesia at POD2; respiratory failure on POD0; kidney injury on POD7; all-cause mortality at POD30 and POD90; intraoperative hypotension; moderate-to-severe intraoperative movement; unplanned hospital admission after outpatient surgery in a free-standing ambulatory surgery centre setting; propofol-related infusion syndrome and malignant hyperthermia.
This study is approved by the ethics board at Washington University, serving as the single Institutional Review Board for all participating sites. Recruitment began in September 2023. Dissemination plans include presentations at scientific conferences, scientific publications, internet-based educational materials and mass media.
To synthesise the evidence on implementation strategies used to implement transitional care interventions for adult surgical patients.
Scoping review.
Medline, CINAHL and EMBASE were searched in August 2023 and updated June 2025, followed by citation searches. Studies were screened independently by two researchers, and one extracted data, another verified its accuracy. Studies about transitional care interventions for adult surgical patients were coded according to the ‘Five classes of implementation strategies’ and the ‘Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations’ framework, to illuminate the review findings.
Based on 27 studies included in the scoping review, staff education, changes to staffing and electronic systems, and change management techniques were frequently used implementation strategies. Implementation strategies were mostly used with patients undergoing colorectal and cardiac surgery in Asia and the United States. Scale-up strategies and capacity-building initiatives for people in charge of spearheading the change initiatives were less common.
To further the field, future research could focus on capacity-building and scale-up strategies, fidelity reporting, and financial implications of implementation in a wider range of surgical populations and settings. Work is needed to effectively implement surgical transitional care interventions in real-world settings.
Our findings provide strategies for hospital leaders to adopt when implementing transitional care interventions for surgical patients.
Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.
Determined review focus, interpreted findings, and contributed to manuscript.
The Open Science Framework.
To identify postoperative interventions and quality improvement initiatives used to prevent wound complications in patients undergoing colorectal surgeries, the types of activities nurses undertake in these interventions/initiatives and how these activities align with nurses' scope of practice.
A scoping review.
Three health databases were searched, and backward and forward citation searching occurred in April 2022. Research and quality improvement initiatives included focussed on adult patients undergoing colorectal surgery, from 2010 onwards. Data were extracted about study characteristics, nursing activities and outcomes. The ‘Dimensions of the scope of nursing practice’ framework was used to classify nursing activities and then the Patterns, Advances, Gaps, Evidence for practice and Research recommendations framework was used to synthesise the review findings.
Thirty-seven studies were included. These studies often reported negative wound pressure therapy and surgical site infection bundle interventions/initiatives. Nurses' scope of practice was most frequently ‘Technical procedure and delegated medical care’ meaning nurses frequently acted under doctors' orders, with the most common delegated activity being dressing removal.
The full extent of possible interventions nurses could undertake independently in the postoperative period requires further exploration to improve wound outcomes and capitalise on nurses' professional role.
Nurses' role in preventing postoperative wound complications is unclear, which may inhibit their ability to influence postoperative outcomes. In the postoperative period, nurses undertake technical activities, under doctors' orders to prevent wound infections. For practice, nurses need to upkeep and audit their technical skills. New avenues for researchers include exploration of independent activities for postoperative nurses and the outcomes of these activities.
There may be opportunities to broaden nurses' scope of practice to act more autonomously to prevent wound complication.
Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist.
A health consumer interpreted the data and prepared the manuscript.
FreshRSS 