Evaluation of patient STress level caused by radiological Investigations in early Postoperative phase After CRANIOtomy (IPAST-CRANIO): protocol of a Swiss prospective cohort study

Abstract

IntroductionPostoperative imaging after neurosurgical interventions is usually performed in the first 72 hours after surgery to provide an accurate assessment of postoperative resection status. Patient frequently report that early postoperative examination after craniotomy for tumour and vascular procedures is associated with distress, exertion, nausea and pain. Delayed postoperative imaging (between 36 and 72 hours postoperatively) may have an advantage regarding psychological and physical stress compared with early imaging. The goal of this study is to evaluate and determine the optimal time frame for postoperative imaging with MRI and CT in terms of medical and neuroradiological implications and patient’s subjective stress level.Methods and analysisData will be prospectively collected from all patients aged 18–80 years who receive postoperative MRI or CT imaging following a craniotomy for resection of a cerebral tumour (benign and malignant) or vascular surgery. Participants have to complete questionnaires containing visual analogue scores (VAS) for headache and nausea, Body Part Discomfort score and a single question addressing subjective preference of timing of postoperative imaging after craniotomy. The primary endpoint of the study is the difference in subjective stress due to imaging studies after craniotomy, measured just before and after postoperative MRI or CT with the above-mentioned instruments. Subjective stress is defined as a combination of the scores VAS pain, VAS nausea and 0.5* Body Part Discomfort core.This study determines whether proper timing of postoperative imaging can improve patient satisfaction and reduce pain, stress and discomfort caused by postoperative imaging. Factors causing additional postoperative stress are likely responsible for delayed recovery of neurosurgical patients.Ethics and disseminationThe institutional review board (Kantonale Ethikkommission Zürich) approved this study on 4 August 2020 under case number BASEC 2020–01590. The authors are planning to publish the data of this study in a peer-reviewed paper. After database closure, the data will be exported to the local data repository (Zurich Open Repository and Archive) of the University of Zurich. The sponsor (LR) and the project leader (MR.G) will make the final decision on the publication of the results. The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author LT. The data are not publicly available due to privacy/ethical restrictions.Trial registration numberNCT05112575; ClinicalTrials.gov.