Purpose Ambulatory surgery is a major area of surgical and anesthetic practice, and preoperative clinics are being increasingly used for low-risk surgical procedures. This study investigated the impact of preoperative evaluation on perioperative events in patients undergoing cataract surgery. Methods This was a retrospective cohort study of 968 consecutive patients undergoing cataract surgery. Details of medical conditions, surgical, anesthetic, and postoperative information were collected from medical records. A logistic regression model was developed using propensity score adjustment for baseline characteristics. Results Out 968 patients included, 240 (24.7%) underwent outpatient preoperative evaluation. There were no perioperative major cardiovascular events. Hypertension occurred in 319 (33%) patients, accounting for 79.7% of all adverse events. Preoperative evaluation resulted in a lower hypertension rate after adjustment for propensity score (OR = 0.6; 95% CI 0.41-0.93); no effects were observed on posterior capsule rupture and emergency visits/hospitalization within 7 days of surgery. Eighty-nine patients (9.3%) had an initial systolic pressure ≥ 180 mm Hg, which was not associated with higher risk of posterior capsule rupture (P = 0.158) or postoperative adverse events (P = 0.902). Median waiting time to surgery was 6 and 2 months for evaluated and non-evaluated patients, respectively (Po0.001). Conclusions In the context of low-risk surgery and no major perioperative and postoperative outcomes, it appears that outpatient preoperative evaluation has no role in reducing adverse events in cataract surgery candidates. Despite fewer hypertensive episodes observed in evaluated patients, these episodes were not associated with any medical or surgical outcomes.

Summary Mortality and morbidity for high‐risk surgical patients are often high, especially in low‐resource settings. Enhanced peri‐operative care has the potential to reduce preventable deaths but must be designed to meet local needs. This before‐and‐after cohort study aimed to assess the effectiveness of a postoperative 48‐hour enhanced care pathway for high‐risk surgical patients (‘high‐risk surgical bundle’) who did not meet the criteria for elective admission to intensive care. The pathway comprised of six elements: risk identification and communication; adoption of a high‐risk post‐anaesthesia care unit discharge checklist; prompt nursing admission to ward; intensification of vital signs monitoring; troponin measurement; and prompt access to medical support if required. The primary outcome was in‐hospital mortality. Data describing 1189 patients from two groups, before and after implementation of the pathway, were compared. The usual care group comprised a retrospective cohort of high‐risk surgical patients between September 2015 and December 2016. The intervention group prospectively included high‐risk surgical patients from February 2019 to March 2020. Unadjusted mortality rate was 10.5% (78/746) for the usual care and 6.3% (28/443) for the intervention group. After adjustment, the intervention effect remained significant (RR 0.46 (95%CI 0.30–0.72). The high‐risk surgical bundle group received more rapid response team calls (24% vs. 12.6%; RR 0.63 [95%CI 0.49–0.80]) and surgical re‐interventions (18.9 vs. 7.5%; RR 0.41 [95%CI 0.30–0.59]). These data suggest that a clinical pathway based on enhanced surveillance for high‐risk surgical patients in a resource‐constrained setting could reduce in‐hospital mortality.