Characterizing Patient‐Centered Postoperative Recovery After Adult Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Review

Background Improving postoperative recovery is important, with a national focus on postacute care, but the volume and quality of evidence in this area are not well characterized. We conducted a systematic review to characterize studies on postoperative recovery after adult cardiac surgery using patient-reported outcome measures. Methods and Results From MEDLINE and Web of Science, studies were included if they prospectively assessed postoperative recovery on adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery using patient-reported outcome measures. Six recovery domains were defined by prior literature: nociceptive symptoms, mental health, physical function, activities of daily living, sleep, and cognitive function. Of the 3432 studies, 105 articles met the inclusion criteria. The studies were small (median sample size, 119), and mostly conducted in single-center settings (n=81; 77%). Study participants were predominantly men (71%) and white (88%). Coronary artery bypass graft was included in 93% (n=98). Studies commonly selected for elective cases (n=56; 53%) and patients with less comorbidity (n=67; 64%). Median follow-up duration was 91 (interquartile range, 42-182) days. Studies most commonly assessed 1 domain (n=42; 40%). The studies also varied in the instruments used and differed in their reporting approach. Studies commonly excluded patients who died during the follow-up period (n=48; 46%), and 45% (n=47) did not specify how those patients were analyzed. Conclusions Studies of postoperative patient-reported outcome measures are low in volume, most often single site without external validation, varied in their approach to missing data, and narrow in the domains and diversity of patients. The evidence base for postoperative patient-reported outcome measures needs to be strengthened.