Patients' perspective and experience is heavily modulated by their understanding of their pre-operative disability along with their overall coping strategy and life philosophy. Given that evidence-based practice is relying on patient-reported outcomes more and more, the orthopaedic community must be diligent in differentiating patients that may have the same objective outcome but vary widely on a patient-reported subjective basis. In clinical practice, patient selection is often a sensitive, experience-based decision process that screens for catastrophization, recognizing that certain patients will not benefit from a simple surgery. It is well appreciated that patient's catastrophization can affect their subjective outcome but there is little reported literature on this abstract concept. The study set out to determine if post-operative outcomes correlated with pre-operative catastrophization scales.

This current study set out to look at a cohort of complex consecutive foot and ankle cases and describe the relationship between Patient Catastrophizing Score (PCS) and multiple functional outcomes that are used commonly in foot and ankle specifically (SF-12 & FAOS). The PCS has three subcategory rumination, helplessness and magnification. A single institution undertook recruitment in consecutive patients within three surgeon's practice. In the end, 46 patients were found to be eligible in the study with an average age of 54.72 ± 14.41 years-old, a majority female 30 / 46 (65.22%), a minority employed at the pre-operative visit 19/46 (41%) and with an average BMI of 26.2 ± 5.56.

We found that the mental component of the SF12 had a statistically significant negative effect with the rumination score (r=−1.03) (p = 0.01) and the helplessness score (r=−1.05) (0.001). There was no statistically significant effect for the physical component of the SF-12. Looking at the FAOS Pain component, it correlated was significantly with the PCS rumination (Multivariate : r= −7.6 (p=0.002) Univariate: r=−2 (0.03)) and helplessness (Multivariate : r=−6.73 (p=0.01) Univariate: r=−1.5 (p=0.03)). Otherwise the FAOS ADL component showed correlation as well with the PCS rumination (Multivariate: r=−4.67 (p=0.02) Univariate : r=−1.85 (p=0.01)), helplessness (Multivariate r=−5.89 (p = 0.01) Univariate r=−1.81 (p = 0.001)) and total score (Multivariate : r=3.74 (p=0.02) Univariate r=−0.75 (p=0.01)). The FAOS Quality of life component was statistically significant for the rumination score (Univariate r=−11.59) (p < 0.05) and the helplessness score (Univariate r=−9.65) (p = 0.002) also the PCS total (Univariate r=8.54) (p = 0.0003).

As layed out in our hypothesis, this study did show an association between an increase patient catastrophizing score pre-operatively and a worse outcome in the following scores: Mental component of SF12, FAOS Pain, FAOS ADL and FAOS Quality of life components. This is an association and no causality can be proven within the limits of this current pilot study, but remains alarming. In elective surgeries, catastrophization should be screened for using the PCS form and potentially modulated pre-operatively with the help of allied health therapist while a patient is on the waitlist.

Lower-extremity orthopaedic procedures may be performed under either regional or general anaesthesia, or a combination of both techniques. There is a growing body of evidence supporting the benefits of regional anaesthesia, with meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials and registry data suggesting decreases in deep surgical site infections, thromboembolic events, cardiopulmonary complications and length of stay associated with use of regional anaesthesia. In patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery specifically, there is evidence demonstrating decreased post-operative pain, nausea, vomiting, opioid use and unplanned hospital admission. This supports an increased role for the use in regional anaesthesia in patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery. However, the type of anaesthetic used is dependent on surgeon, patient, anaesthesiologist and institutional factors. The purpose of this study is to investigate pre-operative factors that predict the type of anaesthetic used in patients undergoing foot and ankle surgery.

Data was collected prospectively on 888 patients undergoing foot or ankle surgery at a single institution. The primary method of anaesthesia for each procedure was recorded. Ten additional variables were recorded and analysed: age, BMI, gender, diabetes, ASA status, procedure length, procedure start time, elective vs. trauma procedure, primary vs. revision procedure and preoperative anticoagulation. Logistic regression modelling was performed to identify factors that independently predict the type of anaesthetic used.

General anaesthetic was employed in 280 patients (32%), and regional anaesthesia was the primary anaesthetic type used in 608 (68%). Logistic regression modelling demonstrated that factors that independently predict use of general anaesthetic include younger age (p<0.0001; Odds Ratio 0.97/year), male sex (0.0033; 1.618), procedure start time (0.0319; 1.066/hour) and length of procedure (<0.0001; 1.520/hour). Patients who underwent general anaesthetic had a mean length of procedure of 108 +/− 77 minutes, whereas patients provided with regional anaesthesia had a mean length of procedure 83 +/− 64 minutes.

With increasing evidence supporting the benefits of regional anaesthesia in patients undergoing lower extremity surgery, it is important to identify modifiable factors that contribute to patients receiving alternative treatments. Since later procedure start time was identified as an independent predictor of general anaesthetic use, there may be a role for identifying patients at increased risk of complications associated with general anaesthesia and scheduling earlier start times. Furthermore, while it is logical that extended length of procedure may be a contraindication to regional anaesthesia, the mean procedure time of 108 minutes in the general anaesthesia group indicates that many of these patients should still be considered candidates for regional anaesthesia.

In the current health care climate, there is an increasing focus on cost savings and resource management. As such, there is an emphasis on decreasing length of stay and performing surgery on an outpatient basis. Consequently, some patients will have unanticipated intra-operative or post-operative adverse events that will necessitate an unplanned post-operative hospital admission or a readmission after discharge. These unplanned admissions or readmissions represent an increased burden on health care systems and can cause cancellation of other scheduled procedures. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether pre-operative patient risk factors or intra-operative events could predict unplanned admission or readmission following discharge in patients undergoing either elective or emergency foot and ankle surgery.

Data was prospectively collected on a total of 889 patients. The patients were divided into two groups: patients without readmissions (N=791) and patients who had an unplanned admission or readmission (N=98). We also collected and analysed the following variables: age, gender, BMI, diabetes, ASA class, surgery start time, length of surgery, regional vs. general anesthetic, elective vs. trauma surgery and type of procedure. Logistic regression models were used to identify risk factors that could independently predict unplanned admissions or readmissions to hospital following foot and ankle surgery.

Factors that could be used to independently predict readmission were length of surgery (p 0.0154, Odds Ratio 1.004) and trauma surgery (0.0167; 1.978). For every 1-hour increase in length of surgery, the odds of unplanned admission/readmission increase by 1.27 times. The odds of patients undergoing surgery for acute traumatic injuries getting readmitted are 1.978 times higher than for elective surgery patients.

In conclusion, our study showed that pre-operative patient risk factors including BMI, diabetes, and ASA status were unable to predict whether patients would have an unplanned admission or readmission. The two factors that were able to predict whether patients would have an unplanned admission or readmission were length of the procedure and trauma surgery – both of which are not readily modifiable. Our results showed that in spite of institutional measures to ensure timely discharge, only 11% of patients required an unplanned admission or readmission.