Quality and Value in Rural Cancer Care.

Nearly 60 million people reside in rural America with only 10% of US general surgeons providing for their surgical care. Rural cancer care has been maligned in the literature due to a lack of understanding of local resource limitations and to the difficulties involved in documenting the quality of local cancer care in small and rural communities. A majority of US cancer patients are diagnosed and treated in community cancer programs, many of which are Commission on Cancer accredited and deliver care that is of high quality and value. The article discusses the components of high quality health care and offers suggestions for solo or small group rural surgeons to assist in collection of their own quality data and comparison to national benchmarks. One small rural program in Appalachian Ohio is used for a best-case example.

Strategies to Improve the Rural Surgical Workforce.

The rural surgical workforce is in crisis, resulting in significant health care access issues for the 60 million rural Americans. Rural surgeons encounter unique barriers to providing care for patients that are different than their urban counterparts. Rural hospitals are failing at an alarming rate. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) and the ACS Advisory Council for Rural Surgery have worked to improve communication among isolated rural surgeons and to bring recognition to rural surgeons as a distinct group. The rural workforce is aging at a rapid rate and multiple factors prevent newly trained surgeons from replacing those that retire. Loss of a surgeon in a small community leads to significant economic losses and possibly even closure of the local hospital. Changes in surgical training, subspecialization, demographic trends, and economic issues all lead to less numbers of young surgeons choosing to practice in small communities. Increasing the numbers of trainees will not reverse the trend unless it is combined with a change in the training paradigm for surgeons with a rural interest, additional funding for more rural training programs and financial support for surgeons to work in rural areas, and collaboration with urban and academic health care systems and their surgeons.

Development of a multilevel intervention to increase colorectal cancer screening in Appalachia.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) screening rates are lower in Appalachian regions of the United States than in non-Appalachian regions. Given the availability of various screening modalities, there is critical need for culturally relevant interventions addressing multiple socioecological levels to reduce the regional CRC burden. In this report, we describe the development and baseline findings from year 1 of "Accelerating Colorectal Cancer Screening through Implementation Science (ACCSIS) in Appalachia," a 5-year, National Cancer Institute Cancer MoonshotSM-funded multilevel intervention (MLI) project to increase screening in Appalachian Kentucky and Ohio primary care clinics. METHODS: Project development was theory-driven and included the establishment of both an external Scientific Advisory Board and a Community Advisory Board to provide guidance in conducting formative activities in two Appalachian counties: one in Kentucky and one in Ohio. Activities included identifying and describing the study communities and primary care clinics, selecting appropriate evidence-based interventions (EBIs), and conducting a pilot test of MLI strategies addressing patient, provider, clinic, and community needs. RESULTS: Key informant interviews identified multiple barriers to CRC screening, including fear of screening, test results, and financial concerns (patient level); lack of time and competing priorities (provider level); lack of reminder or tracking systems and staff burden (clinic level); and cultural issues, societal norms, and transportation (community level). With this information, investigators then offered clinics a menu of EBIs and strategies to address barriers at each level. Clinics selected individually tailored MLIs, including improvement of patient education materials, provision of provider education (resulting in increased knowledge, p = .003), enhancement of electronic health record (EHR) systems and development of clinic screening protocols, and implementation of community CRC awareness events, all of which promoted stool-based screening (i.e., FIT or FIT-DNA). Variability among clinics, including differences in EHR systems, was the most salient barrier to EBI implementation, particularly in terms of tracking follow-up of positive screening results, whereas the development of clinic-wide screening protocols was found to promote fidelity to EBI components. CONCLUSIONS: Lessons learned from year 1 included increased recognition of variability among the clinics and how they function, appreciation for clinic staff and provider workload, and development of strategies to utilize EHR systems. These findings necessitated a modification of study design for subsequent years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Trial NCT04427527 is registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov and was registered on June 11, 2020.

When rural is no longer rural: Demand for subspecialty trained surgeons increases with increasing population of a non-metropolitan area.

BACKGROUND: Surgery in larger, non-metropolitan, communities may be distinct from rural practice. Understanding these differences may help guide training. We hypothesize that increasing community size is associated with a desire for subspecialty surgeons. METHODS: We designed a mixed methods study with the ACS Rural Advisory Council. Rural (<50,000 people), small non-metropolitan (50,000-100,000), and large non-metropolitan (>100,000) communities were compared. Quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed. RESULTS: We received 237 responses, and desire to hire subspecialty-trained surgeons was associated with practice in a large non-metropolitan community, OR 4.5, (1.2-16.5). Qualitative themes demonstrated that rural surgeons limit practices to align with available hospital resources while large non-metropolitan surgeons specialize according to interest and market pressures. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery in rural versus large non-metropolitan communities may be more distinct than previously understood. Rural practice requires broad preparation while large non-metropolitan practice favors subspecialty training.

A rare case of iron-deficiency anemia rapidly progressing to a life-threatening event.

Giant colonic diverticula are extremely rare; however, they should be considered in a patient with a history or susceptibility to diverticular disease because of the nonspecific presentation and life-threatening complications. Giant colonic diverticula often are overlooked because of their nonspecific gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms, leading to complications of obstruction, perforation, abscess formation, and sepsis. A rare and unusual presentation of a giant colonic diverticulum is the development of a bezoar. This case describes a patient whose GI bleeding led to the diagnosis of a giant colonic diverticulum with a bezoar.

Small bowel necrosis in association with jejunal tube feeding.

Early recognition and appropriate treatment of bowel ischemia is imperative to reduce morbidity and mortality in any situation, including in conjunction with enteral tube feeding. GI intolerance can manifest as increased nasogastric tube output, unexplained abdominal pain/distension, and pneumatosis intestinalis in critically ill patients who are on tube feedings and may be experiencing periods of splanchnic hypotension. Recommendations are to immediately cease tube feedings when these signs and symptoms are recognized, and total parenteral nutrition should be considered. Surgical exploration during the early stages should be considered to prevent the usual and fatal catastrophic cascade of widespread bowl infarction.