Including socioeconomic status reduces readmission penalties to safety-net hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: Medicare's Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP) financially penalizes "excessive" postoperative readmissions. Concerned with creating a double standard for institutions treating a high percentage of economically vulnerable patients, Medicare elected to exclude socioeconomic status (SES) from its risk-adjustment model. However, recent evidence suggests that safety-net hospitals (SNHs) caring for many low-SES patients are disproportionately penalized under the HRRP. We sought to simulate the impact of including SES-sensitive models on HRRP penalties for hospitals performing lower extremity revascularization (LER). METHODS: This is a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of national data on Medicare patients undergoing open or endovascular LER procedures between 2007 and 2009. We used hierarchical logistic regression to generate hospital risk-standardized 30-day readmission rates under Medicare's current model (adjusting for age, sex, comorbidities, and procedure type) compared with models that also adjust for SES. We estimated the likelihood of a penalty and penalty size for SNHs compared with non-SNHs under the current Medicare model and these SES-sensitive models. RESULTS: Our study population comprised 1708 hospitals performing 284,724 LER operations with an overall unadjusted readmission rate of 14.4% (standard deviation: 5.3%). Compared with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services model, adjusting for SES would not change the proportion of SNHs penalized for excess readmissions (55.1% vs 53.4%, P = .101) but would reduce penalty amounts for 38% of SNHs compared with only 17% of non-SNHs, P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: For LER, changing national Medicare policy to including SES in readmission risk-adjustment models would reduce penalty amounts to SNHs, especially for those that are also teaching institutions. Making further strides toward reducing the national disparity between SNHs and non-SHNs on readmissions, performance measures require strategies beyond simply altering the risk-adjustment model to include SES.

Finding Comfort in Discomfort Reflecting on Stories Told.

INTRODUCTION: The 2022 Presidential Address for the Association for Academic Surgery was focused on better understanding the personal and professional challenges faced by surgeons during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: As part of this work, we embarked on a listening tour, inviting surgeons from all over the country to tell us their stories. This led to forming a panel of five selected participants based on how their stories crosscut many of the most prevalent themes during those conversations. Here, we present thematic excerpts of the 2022 presidential panel, intending to capture that moment and challenge surgeons to contribute to an ever-evolving movement that pushes us to unpack some of our greatest areas of discomfort. RESULTS: We found that, in many ways, the COVID-19 pandemic brought into focus what many surgeons from marginalized groups have historically struggled with. Dominant themes from these conversations included the role of surgery in informing identity, the tensions between personal and professional identity, the consequences of maintaining medicine as an apolitical space, and reflections on initiatives to address inequities. Panelists also reflected on the hope that these conversations are part of a movement that leads to sustained change rather than a passing moment. CONCLUSIONS: The primary goal of this work was to center voices and experiences in a way that challenges us to become comfortable with topics that often cause discomfort, validate experiences, and foster a community that allows us to rethink what and whom we value in surgery. We hope this work serves as a guide to having these conversations in other institutions.

Association of Sex Differences on Weight Loss and Complications Following Bariatric Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Sex as a biologic variable remains largely understudied, even for the most commonly performed operations. The most effective treatment for obesity and obesity-associated comorbidities is bariatric surgery. There are limited data to describe potential differences in outcomes between male and female patients, particularly with regards to weight loss. Within this context, we examined weight loss and complications up to 1 y following sleeve gastrectomy or gastric bypass within a statewide bariatric quality improvement collaborative. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study among patients who had bariatric surgery. Using a state-wide bariatric-specific data registry, all patients who underwent gastric bypass or sleeve gastrectomy between June 2006 and June 2022 were identified. The primary outcome was percent excess body weight loss and change in body mass index (BMI) at 1 y. The secondary outcome was 30-d risk-adjusted complications. RESULTS: Among 107,504 patients, the majority (n = 85,135; 79.2%) were female and most patients (n = 49,731; 58%) underwent sleeve gastrectomy. Compared to female patients, male patients were older (47.6 y versus 44.8 y; P < 0.0001), had higher baseline weight (346.6 lbs versus 279.9 lbs; P < 0.0001), had higher preoperative BMI (49.9 kg/m2versus 47.2 kg/m2; P < 0.0001), and higher prevalence of most comorbid conditions including hypertension, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, and sleep apnea (P < 0.0001). Compared to female patients, male patients experienced greater total body weight loss (105.1 lbs versus 84.9 lbs; P < 0.0001) and higher excess body weight loss (60.0% versus 58.8%; P < 0.0001) but had higher BMI overall (34.0 kg/m2versus 32.8 kg/m2; P < 0.0001) at 1-y follow-up. Males had higher rates of serious complications (2.5% versus 1.9%; P < 0.0001), leak and perforation (0.5% versus 0.4%; P < 0.0001), venous thromboembolism (0.7% versus 0.4%; P < 0.0001), and medical complications (1.5% versus 1%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this study we found that both males and females experienced excellent weight loss with a low risk of complications following bariatric surgery. Male sex was associated with slightly greater weight loss and slightly higher incidence of complications. However, although statistically significant, clinically, the differences in weight loss was not. Due to males having higher prevalence of comorbidities, providers should consider referring males earlier for bariatric surgery which may improve outcomes for this population.

Barriers to Participation in a Structured Quality Improvement Initiative to Reduce Avoidable Emergency Department Visits-A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Barriers to quality improvement (QI) initiatives in multi-institutional hospital settings are understudied. Here we describe a qualitative investigation of factors negatively affecting a QI initiative focused on reducing avoidable emergency department (ED) visits after bariatric surgery across 17 hospitals. Our goal was to explore participant perspectives and identify themes describing why the program was not effectively implemented or why the program may have been ineffective when correctly implemented. METHODS: We performed semistructured group interviews with 17 sites (42 interviews) participating in a statewide bariatric QI program. We used descriptive content analysis to identify challenges, facilitators, and barriers to implementation of the QI program. All analyses were conducted using MAXQDA software. RESULTS: Results revealed barriers across hospitals related to four themes: buy-in, provider accessibility, resources at participating hospitals, and patient barriers to care. In particular, the initiative faced difficulty if it was not well-matched to the factors driving increasing ED visits at a particular site, such as lack of patient access to outpatient or primary care. Additional challenges occurred if the initiative was not adapted and customized to the working systems in place at each site, involving employees, surgeons, support staff, and leadership. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, findings can direct future focused efforts aimed at site-specific interventions to reduce unnecessary postoperative ED visits. Results demonstrated a need for a nuanced approach that can be adapted based on facility needs and resources.

From Alpha to Omicron and Beyond: Associations Between SARS-CoV-2 Variants and Surgical Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly influenced surgical practices, with SARS-CoV-2 variants presenting unique pathologic profiles and potential impacts on perioperative outcomes. This study explores associations between Alpha, Delta, and Omicron variants of SARS-CoV-2 and surgical outcomes. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis using the National COVID Cohort Collaborative database, which included patients who underwent selected major inpatient surgeries within eight weeks post-SARS-CoV-2 infection from January 2020 to April 2023. The viral variant was determined by the predominant strain at the time of the patient's infection. Multivariable logistic regression models explored the association between viral variants, COVID-19 severity, and 30-d major morbidity or mortality. RESULTS: The study included 10,617 surgical patients with preoperative COVID-19, infected by the Alpha (4456), Delta (1539), and Omicron (4622) variants. Patients infected with Omicron had the highest vaccination rates, most mild disease, and lowest 30-d morbidity and mortality rates. Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that Omicron was linked to a reduced likelihood of adverse outcomes compared to Alpha, while Delta showed odds comparable to Alpha. Inclusion of COVID-19 severity in the model rendered the odds of major morbidity or mortality equal across all three variants. CONCLUSIONS: Our study examines the associations between the clinical and pathological characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 variants and surgical outcomes. As novel SARS-CoV-2 variants emerge, this research supports COVID-19-related surgical policy that assesses the severity of disease to estimate surgical outcomes.

Financial Incentives to Improve Patient Follow-up and Weight Loss After Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To examine effects of a financial incentives program on follow-up and weight loss after bariatric surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Consistent follow-up may improve weight loss and other health outcomes after bariatric surgery. Yet, rates of follow-up after surgery are often low. METHODS: Patients from 3 practices within a statewide collaborative were invited to participate in a 6-month financial incentives program. Participants received incentives for attending postoperative appointments at 1, 3, and 6 months which doubled when participants weighed less than their prior visit. Participants were matched with contemporary patients from control practices by demographics, starting body mass index and weight, surgery date, and procedure. Preintervention estimates used matched historic patients from the same program and control practices with the criteria listed above. Patients between the 2 historic groups were additionally matched on surgery date to ensure balance on matched variables. We conducted differ-ence-in-differences analyses to examine incentives program effects. Follow-up attendance and percent excess weight loss were measured postoperative months 1, 3, 6, and 12. RESULTS: One hundred ten program participants from January 1, 2018 to July 31, 2019 were matched to 203 historic program practice patients (November 20 to December 27, 2017). The control group had 273 preinter-vention patients and 327 postintervention patients. In difference-in-differ-ences analyses, the intervention increased follow-up rates at 1 month (+14.8%, P <0.0001), 3months (+29.4%, P <0.0001), and 6 months (+16.4%, P <0.0001), but not at 12 months. There were no statistically significant differences in excess weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: A financial incentives program significantly increased follow-up after bariatric surgery for up to 6 months, but did not increase weight loss. Our study supports use of incentivized approaches as one way to improve postoperative follow-up, but may not translate into greater weight loss without additional supports.

Rescue Improvement Conference: A Novel Tool for Addressing Failure to Rescue.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the effectiveness of Rescue Improvement Conference, a forum that addresses FTR. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Every year over 150,000 patients die after elective surgery in the United States. FTR is the phenomenon whereby delayed recognition and/or response to serious surgical complications leads to a progressive cascade of adverse events culminating in death. Rescue Improvement Conference is an adapted version of the Ottawa-style morbidity and mortality conference, designed to address common contributors to FTR: ineffective communication and inadequate problem solving. METHODS: Mixed methods data were used to evaluate Rescue Improvement Conference, a bi-monthly forum that was first introduced in our academic medical center in 2018. Conference effectiveness data were collected via survey and open-text responses after 5 conferences between September 2018 and February 2020. We focused on 5 indicators of effectiveness: educational value, conference takeaways, discussion time, changes to surgical practice, and actionable opportunities for improvement. Twelve surgical faculty and house staff also provided feedback during semi-structured interviews. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Conference attendees (N = 140) felt that Rescue Improvement Conference was effective-all 5 indicators had mean scores above 5 on Likert scales. The qualitative data supports the quantitative findings, and 3 additional themes emerged: Rescue Improvement Conference enables the representation of diverse voices, promotes interdisciplinary collaboration, and encourages multilevel problem solving. CONCLUSIONS: Rescue Improvement Conference has the potential to support other surgical departments in developing system-level strategies to recognize and manage postoperative complications by providing stakeholders a forum to identify and discuss factors that contribute to FTR.

Cost-effectiveness of Staple Line Reinforcement in Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a cost-effectiveness analysis of staple-line reinforcement in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Exponential increases in surgical costs have underscored the critical need for evidence-based methods to determine the relative value of surgical devices. One such device is staple-line reinforcement, thought to decrease bleeding rates in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. METHODS: Two intervention arms were modeled, staple-line reinforcement and standard nonreinforced stapling. Bleed and leak rates and 30-day treatment costs were obtained from national and state registries. Quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) values were drawn from previous literature. Device prices were drawn from institutional data. A final incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated, and one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: A total of 346,530 patient records from 2012 to 2018 were included. Complication rates for the reinforced and standard cohorts were 0.05% for major bleed in both cohorts ( P = 0.8841); 0.45% compared with 0.59% for minor bleed ( P < 0.0001); and 0.24% compared with 0.26% for leak ( P = 0.4812). Median cost for a major bleed was $5552 ($3287, $16,817) and $2406 ($1861, $3484) for a minor bleed. Median leak cost was $9897 ($4589, $21,619) and median cost for patients who did not experience a bleed, leak, or other serious complication was $1908 ($1712, $2739). Mean incremental cost of reinforced stapling compared with standard was $819.60/surgery. Net QALY gain with reinforced stapling compared with standard was 0.00002. The resultant incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $40,553,000/QALY. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses failed to produce a value below $150,000/QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with standard stapling, reinforced stapling reduces minor postoperative bleeding but not major bleeding or leaks and is not cost-effective if routinely used in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

Association between choice of reversal agent for neuromuscular block and postoperative pulmonary complications in patients at increased risk undergoing non-emergency surgery: STIL-STRONGER, a multicentre matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications are a source of morbidity after major surgery. In patients at increased risk of postoperative pulmonary complications we sought to assess the association between neuromuscular blocking agent reversal agent and development of postoperative pulmonary complications. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study, a secondary analysis of data collected in the prior STRONGER study. Data were obtained from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group. Included patients were aged 18 yr and older undergoing non-emergency surgery under general anaesthesia with tracheal intubation with neuromuscular block and reversal, who were predicted to be at elevated risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. This risk was defined as American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status 3 or 4 in patients undergoing either intrathoracic or intra-abdominal surgery who were either aged >80 yr or underwent a procedure lasting >2 h. Cohorts were defined by reversal with neostigmine or sugammadex. The primary composite outcome was the occurrence of pneumonia or respiratory failure. RESULTS: After matching by institution, sex, age (within 5 yr), body mass index, anatomic region of surgery, comorbidities, and neuromuscular blocking agent, 3817 matched pairs remained. The primary postoperative pulmonary complications outcome occurred in 224 neostigmine cases vs 100 sugammadex cases (5.9% vs 2.6%, odds ratio 0.41, P<0.01). After adjustment for unbalanced covariates, the adjusted odds ratio for the association between sugammadex use and the primary outcome was 0.39 (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients at increased risk for pulmonary complications compared with neostigmine, use of sugammadex was independently associated with reduced risk of subsequent development of pneumonia or respiratory failure.

Racial variation in baseline characteristics and wait times among patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for obesity and weight-related comorbid diseases, utilization rates are disproportionately low among non-white patients. We sought to understand if variation in baseline characteristics or access to care exists between white and non-white patients. METHODS: Using a statewide bariatric-specific data registry, we evaluated all patients who underwent bariatric surgery between 2006 and 2020 and completed a preoperative baseline questionnaire, which included a question about self-identification of race. Patient characteristics, co-morbidities, and time from initial preoperative clinic evaluation to date of surgery were compared among racial groups. RESULTS: A total of 73,141 patients met inclusion criteria with 18,741 (25.5%) self-identified as non-white. These included Black/African American (n = 11,904), Hispanic (n = 3448), Asian (n = 121), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (n = 41), Middle Eastern (n = 164), Multiple (n = 2047) and other (n = 608). Non-white males were the least represented group, accounting for only 4% of all bariatric cases performed. Non-white patients were more likely to be younger (43.0 years vs. 46.6 years, p < 0.0001), disabled (16% vs. 11.4%, p < 0.0001) and have Medicaid (8.4% vs. 3.8%, p < 0.0001) when compared to white patients, despite having higher rates of college education (78.0% vs. 76.6, p < 0.0001). In addition, median time from initial evaluation to surgery was also longer among non-white patients (157 days vs. 127 days, p < 0.0001), despite having higher rates of patients with a body mass index above 50 kg/m2 (39.0% vs. 33.2%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Non-white patients undergoing bariatric surgery represent an extremely diverse group of patients with more socioeconomic disadvantages and longer wait times when compared to white patients despite presenting with higher rates of severe obesity. Current guidelines and referral patterns for bariatric surgery may not be equitable and need further examination when considering the management of obesity within diverse populations to reduce disparities in care-of which non-white males are particularly at risk.

Evaluating outcomes among surgeons who changed their technique for gastric bypass: a state-wide analysis from 2011 to 2021.

INTRODUCTION: Technical variation exists when performing the gastrojejunostomy during Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). However, it is unclear whether changing technique results in improved outcomes or patient harm. METHODS: Surgeons participating in a state-wide bariatric surgery quality collaborative who completed a survey on how they perform a typical RYGB in 2011 and again in 2021 were included in the analysis (n = 31). Risk-adjusted 30-day complication rates and case characteristics for cases in 2011 were compared to those in 2021 among surgeons who changed their gastrojejunostomy technique from end-to-end anastomosis (EEA) to either a linear staple or handsewn anastomosis (LSA/HSA). In addition, case characteristics and outcomes among surgeons who maintained an EEA technique throughout the study period were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 15 surgeons (48.3%) changed their technique from EEA to LSA/HSA while 7 surgeons (22.3%) did not. Nine surgeons did LSA or HSA the entire period and therefore were not included. Surgeons who changed their technique had significantly lower rates of surgical complications in 2021 when compared to 2011 (1.9% vs 5.1%, p = 0.0015), including lower rates of wound complications (0.5% vs 2.1%, p = 0.0030) and stricture (0.1% vs 0.5%, p = 0.0533). Likewise, surgeons who did not change their EEA technique, also experienced a decrease in surgical complications (1.8% vs 5.8%, p < 0.0001), wound complications (0.7% vs 2.1%, p < 0.0001) and strictures (0.2% vs 1.2%, p = 0.0006). Surgeons who changed their technique had a significantly higher mean annual robotic bariatric volume in 2021 (30.0 cases vs 4.9 cases, p < 0.0001) when compared to those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons who changed their gastrojejunostomy technique from circular stapled to handsewn demonstrated greater utilization of the robotic platform than those who did not and experienced a similar decrease in adverse events during the study period, despite altering their technique. Surgeons who chose to modify their operative technique may be more likely to adopt newer technologies.

Association of program-specific variation in bariatric surgery volume for Medicaid patients and access to care: a tale of inequality?

BACKGROUND: Although patients with lower socioeconomic status are at higher risk of obesity, bariatric surgery utilization among patients with Medicaid is low and may be due to program-specific variation in access. Our goal was to compare bariatric surgery programs by percentage of Medicaid cases and to determine if variation in distribution of patients with Medicaid could be linked to adverse outcomes. METHODS: Using a state-wide bariatric-specific data registry that included 43 programs performing 97,207 cases between 2006 and 2020, we identified all patients with Medicaid insurance (n = 4780, 4.9%). Bariatric surgery programs were stratified into quartiles according to the percentage of Medicaid cases performed and we compared program-specific characteristics as well as baseline patient characteristics, risk-adjusted complication rates and wait times between top and bottom quartiles. RESULTS: Program-specific distribution of Medicaid cases varied between 0.69 and 22.4%. Programs in the top quartile (n = 11) performed 18,885 cases in total, with a mean of 13% for Medicaid patients, while programs in the bottom quartile (n = 11) performed 32,447 cases in total, with a mean of 1%. Patients undergoing surgery at programs in the top quartile were more likely to be Black (20.2% vs 13.5%, p < 0.0001), have diabetes (35.1% vs 29.5%, p < 0.0001), hypertension (55.1% vs 49.6%, p < 0.0001) and hyperlipidemia (47.6% vs 45.2%, p < 0.0001). Top quartile programs also had higher complication rates (8.4% vs 6.6%, p < 0.0001), extended length of stay (5.6% vs 4.0%, p < 0.0001), Emergency Department visits (8.1% vs 6.5%, p < 0.0001) and readmissions (4.7% vs 3.9%, p < 0.0001). Median time from initial evaluation to surgery date was also significantly longer among top quartile programs (200 vs 122 days, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery programs that perform a higher proportion of Medicaid cases tend to care for patients with greater disease severity who experience delays in care and also require more resource utilization. Improving bariatric surgery utilization among patients with lower socioeconomic status may benefit from insurance standardization and program-centered incentives to improve access and equitable distribution of care.

Comparing Diabetes Outcomes: Weight-independent Effects of Sleeve Gastrectomy Versus Matched Patients With Similar Weight Loss.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if sleeve gastrectomy has weight-independent benefits on diabetes outcomes. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Weight loss is recommended when treating conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia. Bariatric surgery has been shown to improve or resolve metabolic conditions, but weight loss outcomes vary by procedure type. METHODS: Using data from a statewide bariatric surgery registry, a total of 988 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of diabetes who underwent either laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) or laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding (LAGB) were included in the study. The patients were matched based on age, race, sex, preoperative body mass index (BMi) and weight loss at 1 year after surgery. Chi-square comparisons were conducted for medication discontinuation for diabetes. Secondary outcome measures included discontinuation of medications for hypertension and hyperlipidemia. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 53.9 years, 75.5% were female, 89.3% were White. Mean preoperative BMi was 44.8 kg/m2 and 75.7% had noninsulin dependent diabetes, whereas 24.3% had insulin dependent diabetes. Mean % BMi loss at 1 year is similar between the 2 groups (8.3% vs 8.1%, P = 0.3811). LSG patients had significantly higher rates of discontinuation of oral diabetes medication (70.4% vs 46.0%, P < 0.0001), insulin (51.7% vs 38.3%, P = 0.0341), anti-hypertensive (41.1% vs 26.0%, P < 0.0001), and cholesterol-lowering medications (40.1% vs 27.8%, P = 0.0016) when compared to LAGB patients. CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar preoperative characteristics and postoperative weight loss, LSG patients experienced significantly higher rates of medication discontinuation for diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia than LAGB. These results suggest that LSG may have weight-independent effects on metabolic disease and should be considered in the treatment of diabetes, regardless of perceived weight loss outcomes.

Patient-reported Comorbidity Assessment After Bariatric Surgery: A Potential Tool to Improve Longitudinal Follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the accuracy of postoperative patient-reported comorbidity assessment, as it may be an important mechanism for long-term follow-up in surgical patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Less than 1% of patients who qualify actually undergo bariatric surgery which may be due to concerns surrounding long-term efficacy. Longitudinal follow-up of patients' comorbidities remains a challenge. METHODS: Retrospective, cross-sectional study of bariatric surgery patients from 38 sites within a state-wide collaborative from 2017 to 2018. A minimum of 10 and maximum of 20 responses to a 1-year postoperative questionnaire from each site were randomly sampled. We examined percent agreement between patient-reported and medical chart audit comorbidity assessment and further evaluated agreement by intraclass correlation or κ statistic. Postoperative comorbidities assessed include weight, hyperlipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, depression, obstructive sleep apnea, gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), anxiety, and pain. RESULTS: Five hundred eighty-five patients completed postoperative questionnaires after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass. The response rate was 64% during the study period. Patients reported weight with a mean difference of 2.7 lbs from chart weight (intraclass correlation = 0.964). Agreement between patient report and audit for all comorbidities was above 80% except for GERD (71%). κ statistics were greater than 0.6 (good agreement) for hyperlipidemia, hypertension, diabetes, and depression. Anxiety ( κ = 0.45) and obstructive sleep apnea ( κ = 0.53) had moderate agreement. Concordance for GERD and pain were fair (both κ = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: Patient-reported comorbidity assessment has high levels of agreement with medical chart audit for many comorbidities and can improve understanding of long-term outcomes. This will better inform patients and providers with hopes of 1 day moving beyond the 1%.

Relationship Between Health Care Spending and Clinical Outcomes in Bariatric Surgery: Implications for Medicare Bundled Payments.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate sources of 90-day episode spending variation in Medicare patients undergoing bariatric surgery and whether spending variation was related to quality of care. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Medicare's bundled payments for care improvement-advanced program includes the first large-scale episodic bundling program for bariatric surgery. This voluntary program will pay bariatric programs a bonus if 90-day spending after surgery falls below a predetermined target. It is unclear what share of bariatric episode spending may be due to unnecessary variation and thus modifiable through care improvement. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of fee-for-service Medicare claims data from 761 acute care hospitals providing inpatient bariatric surgery between January 1, 2011 and September 30, 2016. We measured associations between patient and hospital factors, clinical outcomes, and total Medicare spending for the 90-day bariatric surgery episode using multivariable regression models. RESULTS: Of 64,537 patients, 46% underwent sleeve gastrectomy, 22% revisited the emergency department (ED) within 90 days, and 12.5% were readmitted. Average 90-day episode payments were $14,124, ranging from $12,220 at the lowest-spending quintile of hospitals to $16,887 at the highest-spending quintile. After risk adjustment, 90-day episode spending was $11,447 at the lowest quintile versus $15,380 at the highest quintile (difference $3932, P < 0.001). The largest components of spending variation were readmissions (44% of variation, or $2043 per episode), post-acute care (19% or $871), and index professional fees (15% or $450). The lowest spending hospitals had the lowest complication, ED visit, post-acute utilization, and readmission rates (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this retrospective analysis of Medicare patients undergoing bariatric surgery, the largest components of 90-day episode spending variation are readmissions, inpatient professional fees, and post-acute care utilization. Hospitals with lower spending were associated with lower rates of complications, ED visits, post-acute utilization, and readmissions. Incentives for improving outcomes and reducing spending seem to be well-aligned in Medicare's bundled payment initiative for bariatric surgery.

Evaluating the Impact of Surgeon Self-awareness by Comparing Self Versus Peer Ratings of Surgical Skill and Outcomes for Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate variation in self versus peer-assessments of surgical skill using surgical videos and compare surgeon-specific outcomes with bariatric surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Prior studies have demonstrated that surgeons with lower peer-reviewed ratings of surgical skill had higher complication rates after bariatric surgery. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of 25 surgeons who voluntarily submitted a video of a typical laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG) between 2015 and 2016. Videos were self and peer-rated using a validated instrument based on a 5-point Likert scale (5= "master surgeon" and 1= "surgeon-in-training"). Risk adjusted 30-day complication rates were compared between surgeons who over-rated and under-rated their skill based on data from 24,186 SG cases and 12,888 gastric bypass (GBP) cases. RESULTS: individual overall self-rating of surgical skill varied between 2.5 and 5. Surgeons in the top quartile for self:peer ratings (n = 6, ratio 1.58) had lower overall mean peer-scores (2.98 vs 3.79, P = 0.0150) than surgeons in the lowest quartile (n = 6, ratio 0.94). Complication rates between top and bottom quartiles were similar after SG, however leak rates were higher with gastric bypass among surgeons who over-rated their skill with SG (0.65 vs 0.27, P = 0.0181). Surgeon experience was similar between comparison groups. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Self-perceptions of surgical skill varied widely. Surgeons who over-rated their skill had higher leak rates for more complex procedures. Video assessments can help identify surgeons with poor self-awareness who may benefit from a surgical coaching program.

Evaluation of Patient Reported Gastroesophageal Reflux Severity at Baseline and at 1-year After Bariatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To assess patient-reported gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) severity before and after SG and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Development of new-onset or worsening GERD symptoms after bariatric surgery varies by procedure, but there is a lack of patient-reported data to help guide decision-making. Methods: Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing bariatric surgery in a statewide quality collaborative between 2013 and 2017. We used a validated GERD survey with symptom scores ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 5 (severe daily symptoms) and included patients who completed surveys both at baseline and 1-year after surgery (n = 10,451). We compared the rates of improved and worsened GERD symptoms after SG and RYGB. RESULTS: Within our study cohort, 8680 (83%) underwent SG and 1771 (17%) underwent RYGB. Mean baseline score for all patients was 0.94. Patients undergoing SG experienced similar improvement in GERD symptoms when compared to RYGB (30.4% vs 30.8%, P = 0.7015). However, SG patients also reported higher rates of worsening symptoms (17.8% vs 7.5%, P < 0.0001) even though they were more likely to undergo concurrent hiatal hernia repair (35.1% vs 20.0%, P<0.0001). More than half of patients (53.5%) did not report a change in their score. CONCLUSIONS: Although SG patients reported higher rates of worsening GERD symptoms when compared to RYGB, the majority of patients (>80%) in this study experienced improvement or no change in GERD regardless of procedure. Using clinically relevant patient-reported outcomes can help guide decisions about procedure choice in bariatric surgery for patients with GERD.

Randomized Trial of Medical versus Surgical Treatment for Refractory Heartburn.

BACKGROUND: Heartburn that persists despite proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) treatment is a frequent clinical problem with multiple potential causes. Treatments for PPI-refractory heartburn are of unproven efficacy and focus on controlling gastroesophageal reflux with reflux-reducing medication (e.g., baclofen) or antireflux surgery or on dampening visceral hypersensitivity with neuromodulators (e.g., desipramine). METHODS: Patients who were referred to Veterans Affairs (VA) gastroenterology clinics for PPI-refractory heartburn received 20 mg of omeprazole twice daily for 2 weeks, and those with persistent heartburn underwent endoscopy, esophageal biopsy, esophageal manometry, and multichannel intraluminal impedance-pH monitoring. If patients were found to have reflux-related heartburn, we randomly assigned them to receive surgical treatment (laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication), active medical treatment (omeprazole plus baclofen, with desipramine added depending on symptoms), or control medical treatment (omeprazole plus placebo). The primary outcome was treatment success, defined as a decrease of 50% or more in the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease (GERD)-Health Related Quality of Life score (range, 0 to 50, with higher scores indicating worse symptoms) at 1 year. RESULTS: A total of 366 patients (mean age, 48.5 years; 280 men) were enrolled. Prerandomization procedures excluded 288 patients: 42 had relief of their heartburn during the 2-week omeprazole trial, 70 did not complete trial procedures, 54 were excluded for other reasons, 23 had non-GERD esophageal disorders, and 99 had functional heartburn (not due to GERD or other histopathologic, motility, or structural abnormality). The remaining 78 patients underwent randomization. The incidence of treatment success with surgery (18 of 27 patients, 67%) was significantly superior to that with active medical treatment (7 of 25 patients, 28%; P = 0.007) or control medical treatment (3 of 26 patients, 12%; P<0.001). The difference in the incidence of treatment success between the active medical group and the control medical group was 16 percentage points (95% confidence interval, -5 to 38; P = 0.17). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients referred to VA gastroenterology clinics for PPI-refractory heartburn, systematic workup revealed truly PPI-refractory and reflux-related heartburn in a minority of patients. For that highly selected subgroup, surgery was superior to medical treatment. (Funded by the Department of Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01265550.).

Female Patient Perceptions on Financial Incentives to Promote Follow-Up After Bariatric Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Financial incentives to promote recommended behaviors have been applied in many healthcare settings, but to our knowledge, have never been tested as a strategy to improve patient follow-up after bariatric surgery. Given that females make up majority of bariatric surgery patients, our goal was to explore female patient perceptions on the effects of a financial incentive program designed to increase follow-up after bariatric surgery. METHODS: This was an exploratory qualitative study of patient participants in a pilot program investigating financial incentives. We performed qualitative interviews with female patients to include personal experiences with bariatric surgery, progress toward goals, and concerns related to post-surgical behaviors. The data was analyzed iteratively through inductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-one female patients who had undergone bariatric surgery and enrolled in the financial incentive program participated in this study. Participants had generally positive impressions of the financial incentive program. Participants described the utility of the program in helping to pay for expenses associated with bariatric surgery; feeling that participation was their way of demonstrating that they were compliant with post-surgical recommendations; and that it provided additional motivation. All patients stated that even without the financial incentive they would have continued to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: While financial incentives can provide additional motivation for patients following bariatric surgery, they are not the primary reason that patients choose to follow-up. Understanding the motivation of patients who choose to follow-up (or not) may better inform investigations intended to improve follow-up rates after bariatric surgery.

Questioning the legitimacy of bariatric surgery: a qualitative analysis of individuals from the community who qualify for bariatric surgery.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about how individuals in the community who qualify for bariatric surgery perceive it and how this affects their likelihood to consider it for themselves. This study is the first qualitative study of a racially and ethnically diverse cohort to understand perceptions of bariatric surgery. METHODS: We designed a descriptive study to understand attitudes about bariatric surgery. We interviewed 32 individuals who met NIH criteria for bariatric surgery but have never considered bariatric surgery. We purposively sampled to ensure the majority of participants were non-white. Using an Interpretive Description framework, an exploratory, iterative method was used to code interviews and arrive at final themes. RESULTS: Participants self-identified as 88% female, 75% Black, 3% Hispanic, 3% Pacific Islander, and 19% white. Three major themes emerged from our data regarding legitimacy of bariatric surgery. First, participants perceived bariatric surgery to be something commercialized rather than needed treatment. They equated bariatric surgery with "botulism of the lips" or "cool sculpting." Second, an important contributor to the lack of legitimacy as a medical treatment was that many had not heard about bariatric surgery before from their doctors. Doctors were trusted sources for legitimate information about health. Lastly, conflicting information over bariatric surgery-related diet and weight loss further diminished the legitimacy of bariatric surgery. As one participant reflected about pre-operative weight loss requirements, "[If] I'm going to do that, I might as well just keep losing the weight. Why even go do the surgery?". CONCLUSION: Though bariatric surgery is a safe, effective, and durable therapy for patients with obesity, the majority of individuals we interviewed had concerns over the legitimacy of bariatric surgery as a medical treatment. Moving forward in reaching out to communities about bariatric surgery, healthcare providers and systems should consider the presentation of information to attenuate these concerns.