A Qualitative Study of Barriers to Anal Cancer Screenings in US Veterans Living with HIV.

People living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) are at high risk for anal cancer. Anal cancer screenings are recommended annually for US veterans with HIV. Screenings can identify treatable precursor lesions and prevent cancer development. In a previous study, we found screening rate to be only 15%. Semistructured interviews were conducted with Veterans Affairs (VA) providers who treat veterans living with HIV. Participants described their experiences with anal cancer screenings. Researchers developed a codebook based on Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and coded data using thematic analysis to identify barriers to anal cancer screenings. Twenty-three interviews were conducted with VA providers representing 10 regions. Barriers identified corresponded with five targetable TDF domains: Knowledge, Skills, Environmental Context/Resources, Professional Roles/Identities, and Social Influence. Many providers lacked knowledge of screening protocols. Knowledgeable providers often lacked needed resources, including swabs, clinic space, reliable pathology, access to high-resolution anoscopy, or leadership support to implement a screening program. Providers mentioned competing priorities in the care of veterans with HIV infection and lack of skilled/trained personnel to perform the tests. It was often unclear which provider specialty should "own" screening responsibilities. Additional factors included patient discomfort with screening exams. Anal cancer screening protocols are recommended but not widely adopted in VA. There is a critical need to address barriers to anal cancer screenings in veterans. The TDF domains identified align with five intervention domains to target, including education, training, resource/environment, delineation of provider roles, and improved counseling efforts. Targeting these barriers may help improve the uptake of anal cancer screenings within VA.

Identifying Patterns in Preoperative Communication about High-Risk Surgical Intervention: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Surgeons are entrusted with providing patients with information necessary for deliberation about surgical intervention. Ideally, surgical consultations generate a shared understanding of the treatment experience and determine whether surgery aligns with a patient's overall health goals. In-depth assessment of communication patterns might reveal opportunities to better achieve these objectives. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis of audio-recorded consultations between surgeons and patients considering high-risk surgery. For 43 surgeons, we randomly selected 4 transcripts each of consultations with patients aged ≥60 y with at least 1 comorbidity. We developed a coding taxonomy, based on principles of informed consent and shared decision making, to categorize surgeon speech. We grouped transcripts by treatment plan and recorded the treatment goal. We used box plots, Sankey diagrams, and flow diagrams to characterize communication patterns. RESULTS: We included 169 transcripts, of which 136 discussed an oncologic problem and 33 considered a vascular (including cardiac and neurovascular) problem. At the median, surgeons devoted an estimated 8 min (interquartile range 5-13 min) to content specifically about intervention including surgery. In 85.5% of conversations, more than 40% of surgeon speech was consumed by technical descriptions of the disease or treatment. "Fix-it" language was used in 91.7% of conversations. In 79.9% of conversations, no overall goal of treatment was established or only a desire to cure or control cancer was expressed. Most conversations (68.6%) began with an explanation of the disease, followed by explanation of the treatment in 53.3%, and then options in 16.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Explanation of disease and treatment dominate surgical consultations, with limited time spent on patient goals. Changing the focus of these conversations may better support patients' deliberation about the value of surgery.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02623335. HIGHLIGHTS: In decision-making conversations about high-risk surgical intervention, surgeons emphasize description of the patient's disease and potential treatment, and the use of "fix-it" language is common.Surgeons dedicated limited time to eliciting patient preferences and goals, and 79.9% of conversations resulted in no explicit goal of treatment.Current communication practices may be inadequate to support deliberation about the value of surgery for individual patients and their families.

Factors Associated With Provision of Nonbeneficial Surgery: A National Survey of Surgeons.

OBJECTIVE: We tested the association of systems factors with the surgeon's likelihood of offering surgical intervention for older adults with life-limiting acute surgical conditions. BACKGROUND: Use of surgical treatments in the last year of life is frequent. Improved risk prediction and clinician communication are solutions proposed to improve serious illness care, yet systems factors may also drive receipt of nonbeneficial treatment. METHODS: We mailed a national survey to 5200 surgeons randomly selected from the American College of Surgeons database comprised of a clinical vignette describing a seriously ill older adult with an acute surgical condition, which utilized a 2×2 factorial design to assess patient and systems factors on receipt of surgical treatment to surgeons. RESULTS: Two thousand one hundred sixty-one surgeons responded for a weighted response rate of 53%. For an 87-year-old patient with fulminant colitis and advanced dementia or stage IV lung cancer, 40% of surgeons were inclined to offer an operation to remove the patient's colon while 60% were inclined to offer comfort-focused care only. Surgeons were more likely to offer surgery when an operating room was readily available (odds ratio: 4.05, P <0.001) and the family requests "do everything" (odds ratio: 2.18, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Factors outside the surgeon's control contribute to nonbeneficial surgery, consistent with our model of clinical momentum. Further characterization of the systems in which these decisions occur might expose novel strategies to improve serious illness care for older patients and their families.

Disparities in the Management of Pediatric Breast Masses.

INTRODUCTION: Disparities in surgical management have been documented across a range of disease processes. The objective of this study was to investigate sociodemographic disparities in young females undergoing excision of a breast mass. METHODS: A retrospective study of females aged 10-21 y who underwent surgery for a breast lesion across eleven pediatric hospitals from 2011 to 2016 was performed. Differences in patient characteristics, workup, management, and pathology by race/ethnicity, insurance status, median neighborhood income, and urbanicity were evaluated with bivariate and multivariable regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 454 females were included, with a median age of 16 y interquartile range (IQR: 3). 44% of patients were nonHispanic (NH) Black, 40% were NH White, and 7% were Hispanic. 50% of patients had private insurance, 39% had public insurance, and 9% had other/unknown insurance status. Median neighborhood income was $49,974, and 88% of patients resided in a metropolitan area. NH Whites have 4.5 times the odds of undergoing preoperative fine needle aspiration or core needle biopsy compared to NH Blacks (CI: 2.0, 10.0). No differences in time to surgery from the initial imaging study, size of the lesion, or pathology were observed on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant differences by race/ethnicity, insurance status, household income, or urbanicity in the time to surgery after the initial imaging study. The only significant disparity noted on multivariable analysis was NH White patients were more likely to undergo preoperative biopsy than were NH Black patients; however, the utility of biopsy in pediatric breast masses is not well established.

Severe Pancreatitis Multidisciplinary Working Group: Exploratory Analysis to Optimize Care and Cost.

INTRODUCTION: The minimally invasive step-up approach to pancreatitis improves outcomes. Multidisciplinary working groups may best facilitate this approach. However, support for these working groups requires funding. We hypothesize that patients requiring surgical debridement generate sufficient revenue to sustain these working groups. Furthermore, patients selected for surgical debridement by the working group will have a higher rate of percutaneous and endoscopic intervention in adherence to the step-up approach. METHODS: We conducted an observational cohort study of all patients with severe acute and/or necrotizing pancreatitis whose care was overseen by our multidisciplinary working group (October 2015 through January 2019). Patient demographics, hospital treatments, and outcomes data were compared between those who underwent surgical debridement and those who did not. Hospital billing data were also collected from those who are undergoing surgical debridement and compared to institutional benchmarks for financial sustainability. RESULTS: A total of 108 patients received care overseen by the working group, 10 of which progressed to surgical debridement. The mean contribution margin percentages for each patient in the surgical debridement group were higher than the threshold value for financial sustainability, 39% (60.34% ± 16.66%; P = 0.004). Patients in the surgical debridement group were more likely to undergo intervention by interventional radiologist (odds ratio, 1.58; P = 0.005). The mortality was higher in the nonsurgical debridement group (odds ratio, 15; P = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: Our multidisciplinary working group delivered step-up care to patients with pancreatitis. Patients requiring surgical debridement generated a significantly positive contribution margin that could be used to help support the costs associated with providing multidisciplinary care.

How to Support Patients Near the End of Life Whose Pain Is Best Treated With Surgery?

For seriously ill patients whose pain is best treated with surgery, it is important to discuss and explore treatment goals preoperatively. Knowing which health states a patient would tolerate helps the surgeon identify interventions that are overly burdensome, overreach survival goals, or undermine the patient's quality of life. Surgical success should be defined by how well an intervention aligns with patients' goals. Early integration of specialty palliative care can help identify surgical patients with unmet needs, optimize symptom management, clarify preferences, and improve end-of-life care.

Expressions of conflict following postoperative complications in older adults having major surgery.

BACKGROUND: After serious postoperative complications, patients and families may experience conflict about goals of care. METHODS: We performed a multisite randomized clinical trial to test the effect of a question prompt list on postoperative conflict. We interviewed family members and patients age ≥60 who experienced serious complications. We used qualitative content analysis to analyze conflict and characterize patient experiences with complications. RESULTS: Fifty-six of 446 patients suffered a serious complication. Participants generally did not report conflict relating to postoperative treatments and expressed support for the care they received. We did not appreciate a difference in conflict between intervention and usual care. Respondents reported feeling unprepared for complications, witnessing heated interactions among team members, and a failure to develop trust for their surgeon preoperatively. CONCLUSION: Postoperative conflict following serious complications is well described but its incidence may be low. Nonetheless, patient and family observations reveal opportunities for improvement.

Top Ten Tips Palliative Care Clinicians Should Know About Trauma and Emergency Surgery.

There is growing interest in, and need for, integrating palliative care (PC) into the care of patients undergoing emergency surgery and those with traumatic injury. Thus, PC consults for these populations will likely grow in the coming years. Understanding the nuances and unique characteristics of these two acutely ill populations will improve the care that PC clinicians can provide. Using a modified Delphi technique, this article offers 10 tips that experts in the field, based on their broad clinical experience, believe PC clinicians should know about the care of trauma and emergency surgery patients.

Frequency of Preoperative Advance Care Planning for Older Adults Undergoing High-risk Surgery: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: For patients facing major surgery, surgeons believe preoperative advance care planning (ACP) is valuable and routinely performed. How often preoperative ACP occurs is unknown. Objective: To quantify the frequency of preoperative ACP discussion and documentation for older adults undergoing major surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This secondary analysis of data from a multisite randomized clinical trial testing the effects of a question prompt list intervention on preoperative communication for older adults considering major surgery was performed at 5 US academic medical centers. Participants included surgeons who routinely perform high-risk surgery and patients 60 years or older with at least 1 comorbidity and an oncological or vascular (cardiac, peripheral, or neurovascular) problem. Data were collected from June 1, 2016, to November 30, 2018. Interventions: Patients received a question prompt list brochure with 11 questions that they might ask their surgeon. Main Outcomes and Measures: For patients who had major surgery, any statement related to ACP from the surgeon, patient, or family member during the audiorecorded preoperative consultation was counted. The presence of a written advance directive (AD) in the medical record at the time of the initial consultation or added preoperatively was recorded. Open-ended interviews with patients who experienced postoperative complications and family members were conducted. Results: Among preoperative consultations with 213 patients (122 men [57%]; mean [SD] age, 72 [7] years), only 13 conversations had any discussion of ACP. In this cohort of older patients with at least 1 comorbid condition, 141 (66%) did not have an AD on file before major surgery; there was no significant association between the presence of an AD and patient age (60-69 years, 26 [31%]; 70-79 years, 31 [33%]; ≥80 years, 15 [42%]; P = .55), number of comorbidities (1, 35 [32%]; 2, 18 [33%]; ≥3, 19 [40%]; P = .62), or type of procedure (oncological, 53 [32%]; vascular, 19 [42%]; P = .22). There was no difference in preoperative communication about ACP or documentation of an AD for patients who were mailed a question prompt list brochure (intervention, 38 [35%]; usual care, 34 [33%]; P = .77). Patients with complications were enthusiastic about ACP but did not think it was important to discuss their preferences for life-sustaining treatments with their surgeon preoperatively. Conclusions and Relevance: Although surgeons believe that preoperative discussion of patient preferences for postoperative life-sustaining treatments is important, these preferences are infrequently explored, addressed, or documented preoperatively. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02623335.

Best case/worst case for the trauma ICU: Development and pilot testing of a communication tool for older adults with traumatic injury.

BACKGROUND: "Best Case/Worst Case" (BC/WC) is a communication tool to support shared decision making in older adults with surgical illness. We aimed to adapt and test BC/WC for use with critically ill older adult trauma patients. METHODS: We conducted focus groups with 48 trauma clinicians in Wisconsin, Texas, and Oregon. We used qualitative content analysis to characterize feedback and adapted the tool to fit this setting. Using rapid sequence iterative design, we developed an implementation tool kit. We pilot tested this intervention at two trauma centers using a pre-post study design with older trauma patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). Main outcome measures included study feasibility, intervention acceptability, quality of communication, and clinician moral distress. RESULTS: BC/WC for trauma patients uses a graphic aid to document major events over time, illustrate plausible scenarios, and convey uncertainty. We enrolled 86 of 116 eligible patients and their surrogates (48 pre/38 postintervention). The median patient age was 72 years (51-95 years) and mean Geriatric Trauma Outcome Score was 126.1 (±30.6). We trained 43 trauma attendings and trauma fellows to use the intervention. Ninety-four percent could perform essential tool elements after training. The median end-of-life communication score (scale 0-10) improved from 4.5 to 6.6 (p = 0.006) after intervention as reported by family and from 4.1 to 6.0 (p = 0.03) as reported by nurses. Moral distress did not change. However, there was improvement (less distress) reported by physicians regarding "witnessing providers giving false hope" from 7.34 to 5.03 (p = 0.022). Surgeons reported the tool put multiple clinicians on the same page and was useful for families, but tedious to incorporate into rounds. CONCLUSION: BC/WC trauma ICU is acceptable to clinicians and may support improved communication in the ICU. Future efficacy testing is threatened by enrollment challenges for severely injured older adults and their family members. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, level III.

Management of Pediatric Breast Masses: A Multi-institutional Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The objective of our study was to describe the workup, management, and outcomes of pediatric patients with breast masses undergoing operative intervention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted of girls 10-21 y of age who underwent surgery for a breast mass across 11 children's hospitals from 2011 to 2016. Demographic and clinical characteristics were summarized. RESULTS: Four hundred and fifty-three female patients with a median age of 16 y (IQR: 3) underwent surgery for a breast mass during the study period. The most common preoperative imaging was breast ultrasound (95%); 28% reported the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) classification. Preoperative core biopsy was performed in 12%. All patients underwent lumpectomy, most commonly due to mass size (45%) or growth (29%). The median maximum dimension of a mass on preoperative ultrasound was 2.8 cm (IQR: 1.9). Most operations were performed by pediatric surgeons (65%) and breast surgeons (25%). The most frequent pathology was fibroadenoma (75%); 3% were phyllodes. BI-RADS scoring ≥4 on breast ultrasound had a sensitivity of 0% and a negative predictive value of 93% for identifying phyllodes tumors. CONCLUSIONS: Most pediatric breast masses are self-identified and benign. BI-RADS classification based on ultrasound was not consistently assigned and had little clinical utility for identifying phyllodes.

Continued Prescribing of Periprocedural Codeine and Tramadol to Children after a Black Box Warning.

BACKGROUND: Codeine and tramadol are commonly used analgesics in surgery. In 2013, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a contraindication to the use of codeine in tonsillectomy and adenoidectomy patients aged below 18 y. This warning was expanded in April 2017 to include tramadol and all children aged below 12 y. We sought to describe the prescribing of codeine and tramadol to contraindicated populations in Wisconsin before and after the release of the expanded FDA warning. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a statewide Wisconsin claims database, we identified common pediatric ambulatory surgical procedures across the specialties of otolaryngology, urology, general surgery, orthopedics, and ophthalmology. For these procedures, we examined the rates of perioperative codeine and tramadol prescription fills and change in prescribing after the FDA contraindication. RESULTS: Surgeons in all of the specialties studied continued to prescribe codeine to pediatric patients after the contraindication, but tramadol was rarely prescribed. Procedures with relatively high rates of codeine fills were strabismus repair (65% of opioid fills), circumcision >1 yo (22%), and laparoscopic appendectomy (15%). Codeine fills significantly declined after the contraindication to 6% for circumcision >1 yo and 5% for orchiopexy and inguinal hernia repair. Otolaryngology, which was subject to the 2013 codeine contraindication, has low rates of codeine fills (under 2.5%) for the whole period studied. Codeine prescribing for strabismus repair showed no significant decline. CONCLUSIONS: Codeine, and to a lesser extent tramadol, continue to be prescribed to contraindicated populations of children. This represents a target for future de-implementation interventions.

Progressive reduction of hospital length of stay following minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum: A retrospective comparison of three analgesia modalities, the role of addressing patient anxiety, and reframing patient expectations.

PURPOSE: Management of postoperative pain is a significant challenge following the Nuss procedure. Epidurals, PCAs, and newer analgesia modalities have been used elsewhere without demonstrating consistent improvement in the reported length of hospital stays (LOS). We reviewed a large single surgeon experience identifying three different methods of analgesia used over time to highlight marked improvement in patient LOS. METHODS: IRB approval was obtained and patient clinical information was retrospectively reviewed from 2001 to 2017. The primary outcome variable was length of hospital stay. An expanded preoperative consultation reviews the issue of pain, the negative impact of anxiety on recovery, and our current success of shortened hospital stays with our patients. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-three patients representing three different analgesia approaches had a LOS of 4.4 days (epidural); 2.2 days (PCA/intercostal nerve block); and 1.6 days (scheduled oral pain meds/intercostal nerve blocks). The current LOS for patients is 1.0 day. Patients successfully stop using narcotics by the end of the first week postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative intercostal nerve blocks, scheduled postoperative pain medications, and enhanced preoperative consultation aimed to educate patients about anxiety and reframe patient pain expectations have collectively decreased LOS, and reduced postoperative narcotic usage. TYPE OF STUDY: Clinical research LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.