{"title":"Surgical cancellation and changes in postoperative level of care among high and moderate risk surgical patients in the UK.","authors":"Joanna K L Wong, Rosanna Sasson, Christopher Oddy","doi":"10.1177/17511437261495043","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The clinical and administrative pressures leading to cancellation of surgery are well established. However, it is not known whether the same factors lead to a change in patients' planned postoperative destination and level of care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a secondary analysis of the REPACC dataset; a nationwide, retrospective, observational study examining the provision of enhanced and critical care services in the UK. The reasons for cancellation and changes to the level of care received postoperatively were ascertained from free-text data.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis included 5990 patients from 65 sites across the UK, of which 539 (9.6%) had their surgery cancelled. The most common reason for surgical cancellation was a lack of resources (51.0%), primarily bed shortages (37.1%). Among the 5451 patients who proceeded with surgery, 81.3% received the anticipated level of care postoperatively, 3.9% required escalation and 14.8% were de-escalated to a lower level of care. Changes to the anticipated level of care occurred most often among patients initially triaged to enhanced care. Clinical reasons were the major cause of escalation (53.3%) and de-escalation (61.2%) postoperatively with bed shortages accounting for a minority. Patients were commonly de-escalated following a postoperative assessment (21.8%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Cancellation of surgery in the UK is primarily a consequence of resource scarcity, whereas clinical reasons account for the majority of those re-allocated to different levels of care postoperatively. Future work should explore the clinical and health economic impacts of this dynamic bed management with particular focus on the role of enhanced care as an interface between critical care and the ward.</p>","PeriodicalId":39161,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","volume":" ","pages":"17511437261495043"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13658631/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Intensive Care Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17511437261495043","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The clinical and administrative pressures leading to cancellation of surgery are well established. However, it is not known whether the same factors lead to a change in patients' planned postoperative destination and level of care.
Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of the REPACC dataset; a nationwide, retrospective, observational study examining the provision of enhanced and critical care services in the UK. The reasons for cancellation and changes to the level of care received postoperatively were ascertained from free-text data.
Results: Our analysis included 5990 patients from 65 sites across the UK, of which 539 (9.6%) had their surgery cancelled. The most common reason for surgical cancellation was a lack of resources (51.0%), primarily bed shortages (37.1%). Among the 5451 patients who proceeded with surgery, 81.3% received the anticipated level of care postoperatively, 3.9% required escalation and 14.8% were de-escalated to a lower level of care. Changes to the anticipated level of care occurred most often among patients initially triaged to enhanced care. Clinical reasons were the major cause of escalation (53.3%) and de-escalation (61.2%) postoperatively with bed shortages accounting for a minority. Patients were commonly de-escalated following a postoperative assessment (21.8%).
Conclusion: Cancellation of surgery in the UK is primarily a consequence of resource scarcity, whereas clinical reasons account for the majority of those re-allocated to different levels of care postoperatively. Future work should explore the clinical and health economic impacts of this dynamic bed management with particular focus on the role of enhanced care as an interface between critical care and the ward.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the Intensive Care Society (JICS) is an international, peer-reviewed journal that strives to disseminate clinically and scientifically relevant peer-reviewed research, evaluation, experience and opinion to all staff working in the field of intensive care medicine. Our aim is to inform clinicians on the provision of best practice and provide direction for innovative scientific research in what is one of the broadest and most multi-disciplinary healthcare specialties. While original articles and systematic reviews lie at the heart of the Journal, we also value and recognise the need for opinion articles, case reports and correspondence to guide clinically and scientifically important areas in which conclusive evidence is lacking. The style of the Journal is based on its founding mission statement to ‘instruct, inform and entertain by encompassing the best aspects of both tabloid and broadsheet''.