Mixed-methods evaluation of the Perioperative Medicine Service for High-Risk Patients Implementation Pilot (POMSHIP): a study protocol

dc.contributor.author

Walker, David

dc.contributor.author

Wagstaff, Duncan

dc.contributor.author

McGuckin, Dermot

dc.contributor.author

Vindrola-Padros, Cecilia

dc.contributor.author

Swart, Nicholas

dc.contributor.author

Morris, Stephen

dc.contributor.author

Crowe, Sonya

dc.contributor.author

Fulop, Naomi J

dc.contributor.author

Moonesinghe, S Ramani

dc.date.accessioned

2019-01-23T15:22:42Z

dc.date.available

2019-01-23T15:22:42Z

dc.date.issued

2018-10

dc.date.updated

2019-01-23T15:22:40Z

dc.description.abstract

<jats:sec><jats:title>Introduction</jats:title><jats:p>Perioperative complications have a lasting effect on health-related quality of life and long-term survival. The Royal College of Anaesthetists has proposed the development of perioperative medicine (POM) services as an intervention aimed at improving postoperative outcome, by providing better coordinated care for high-risk patients. The Perioperative Medicine Service for High-risk Patients Implementation Pilot was developed to determine if a specialist POM service is able to reduce postoperative morbidity, failure to rescue, mortality and cost associated with hospital admission. The service involves individualised objective risk assessment, admission to a postoperative critical care unit and follow-up on the surgical ward by the POM team. This paper introduces the service and how it will be evaluated.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods and analysis of the evaluation</jats:title><jats:p>A mixed-methods evaluation is exploring the impact of the service. Clinical effectiveness of the service is being analysed using a ‘before and after’ comparison of the primary outcome (the PostOperative Morbidity Score). Secondary outcomes will include length of stay, validated surveys to explore quality of life (EQ-5D) and quality of recovery (Quality of Recovery-15 Score). The impact on costs is being analysed using ‘before and after’ data from the Patient-Level Information and Costing System and the National Schedule of Reference Costs. The perceptions and experiences of staff and patients with the service, and how it is being implemented, are being explored by a qualitative process evaluation.</jats:p></jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Ethics and dissemination</jats:title><jats:p>The study was classified as a service evaluation. Participant information sheets and consent forms have been developed for the interviews and approvals required for the use of the validated surveys were obtained. The findings of the evaluation are being used formatively, to make changes in the service throughout implementation. The findings will also be used to inform the potential roll-out of the service to other sites.</jats:p></jats:sec>

dc.identifier.issn

2044-6055

dc.identifier.issn

2044-6055

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/17917

dc.language

en

dc.publisher

BMJ

dc.relation.ispartof

BMJ Open

dc.relation.isversionof

10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021647

dc.title

Mixed-methods evaluation of the Perioperative Medicine Service for High-Risk Patients Implementation Pilot (POMSHIP): a study protocol

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Whittle, John|0000-0002-3859-679X

pubs.begin-page

e021647

pubs.end-page

e021647

pubs.issue

10

pubs.organisational-group

School of Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

Anesthesiology, General, Vascular, High Risk Transplant & Critical Care

pubs.organisational-group

Anesthesiology

pubs.organisational-group

Clinical Science Departments

pubs.publication-status

Published

pubs.volume

8

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
POMSHIP paper.pdf
Size:
726.69 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Published version