Physician Burnout and Well-Being: A Systematic Review and Framework for Action.

BACKGROUND: Physician burnout in the United States has reached epidemic proportions and is rising rapidly, although burnout in other occupations is stable. Its negative impact is far reaching and includes harm to the burned-out physician, as well as patients, coworkers, family members, close friends, and healthcare organizations. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this review is to provide an accurate, current summary of what is known about physician burnout and to develop a framework to reverse its current negative impact, decrease its prevalence, and implement effective organizational and personal interventions. DATA SOURCES: I completed a comprehensive MEDLINE search of the medical literature from January 1, 2000, through December 28, 2016, related to medical student and physician burnout, stress, depression, suicide ideation, suicide, resiliency, wellness, and well-being. In addition, I selectively reviewed secondary articles, books addressing the relevant issues, and oral presentations at national professional meetings since 2013. STUDY SELECTION: Healthcare organizations within the United States were studied. RESULTS: The literature review is presented in 5 sections covering the basics of defining and measuring burnout; its impact, incidence, and causes; and interventions and remediation strategies. CONCLUSIONS: All US medical students, physicians in training, and practicing physicians are at significant risk of burnout. Its prevalence now exceeds 50%. Burnout is the unintended net result of multiple, highly disruptive changes in society at large, the medical profession, and the healthcare system. Both individual and organizational strategies have been only partially successful in mitigating burnout and in developing resiliency and well-being among physicians. Two highly effective strategies are aligning personal and organizational values and enabling physicians to devote 20% of their work activities to the part of their medical practice that is especially meaningful to them. More research is needed.

Colorectal Surgery Outcomes in Chronic Dialysis Patients: An American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Study.

BACKGROUND: More than 450,000 US patients with end-stage renal disease currently dialyze. The risk of morbidity and mortality for these patients after colorectal surgery has been incompletely described. OBJECTIVE: We analyzed the 30-day morbidity and mortality rates of chronic dialysis patients who underwent colorectal surgery. DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis. SETTINGS: Hospitals that participate in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program were included. PATIENTS: The study included adult patients who underwent emergency or elective colon or rectal resection between 2009 and 2014. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline characteristics were compared by dialysis status. The impact of chronic dialysis on 30-day mortality and serious postoperative morbidity was examined using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: We identified 128,757 patients who underwent colorectal surgery in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Chronic dialysis patients accounted for 1% (n = 1285) and were more likely to be older (65.4 vs 63.2 years; p < 0.0001), black (27.2% vs 8.7%; p < 0.0001), preoperatively septic (22.1% vs 7.1%; p < 0.0001), require emergency surgery (52.0% vs 14.7%; p < 0.0001), have ischemic bowel (15.7% vs 1.6%; p < 0.0001), or have perforation/peritonitis (15.5% vs 4.2%; p < 0.0001). Chronic dialysis patients were also less likely to have a laparoscopic procedure (17.3% vs 45.0%; p < 0.0001). Chronic dialysis patients had higher unadjusted mortality (22.4% vs 3.3%; p < 0.0001), serious postoperative morbidity (47.9% vs 18.8%; p < 0.0001), and median length of stay (9 vs 6 days; p < 0.0001). In emergent cases (n = 19,375), multivariate logistic regression models demonstrated a higher risk of mortality for dialysis patients (OR = 1.73 (95% CI, 1.38-2.16)) but not for serious morbidity. Models for elective surgery demonstrated a similar effect on mortality (OR = 2.47 (95% CI, 1.75-3.50)) but also demonstrated a higher risk of serious morbidity (OR = 1.28 (95% CI, 1.04-1.56)). LIMITATIONS: The postoperative 30-day window may underestimate the true incidence of serious morbidity and mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic dialysis patients undergoing elective or emergent colorectal procedures have a higher risk-adjusted mortality.

Analyzing Operative Note Structure in Development of a Section Header Resource.

Operative notes contain essential details of surgical procedures and are an important form of clinical documentation. Sections within operative notes segment provide high level note structure. We evaluated the HL7 Implementation Guide for Clinical Document Architecture Release 2.0 Operative Note Draft Standard for Trial Use (HL7-ON DSTU) Release 1 as well as Logical Observation Identifiers Names and Codes (LOINC®) section names on 384 unique section headers from 362,311 operative notes. Overall, HL7-ON DSTU alone and HL7-ON DSTU with LOINC® section headers covered 66% and 79% of sections headers (93% and 98% of header instances), respectively. Section headers contained large numbers of synonyms, formatting variation, and variation of word forms, as well as smaller numbers of compound sections and issues with mismatches in header granularity. Robust operative note section mapping is important for clinical note interoperability and effective use of operative notes by natural language processing systems. The resulting operative note section resource is made publicly available.

Adenocarcinoma of the rectum in patients under age 40 is increasing: impact of signet-ring cell histology.

BACKGROUND: Overall, the incidence of colorectal cancer appears to be stable or diminishing. However, based on our practice pattern, we observed that the incidence of rectal cancer in patients under 40 is increasing and may be associated with a prominence of signet-ring cell histology. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to verify the rising trend in rectal cancer in patients under 40 and describe the histology prominent in that cohort. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. SETTING AND PATIENTS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients diagnosed with rectal adenocarcinoma from 1980 to 2010 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Rectal cancer incidence, histology, and associated staging characteristics were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: Although the incidence of rectal cancer for all ages remained stable from 1980 to 2010, we observed an annual percent change of +3.6% in the incidence of rectal cancer in patients under 40. The prevalence of signet cell histology in patients under 40 was significantly greater than in patients over 40 (3% vs 0.87%, p < 0.01). A multivariate regression analysis revealed an adjusted odds ratio of 3.6 (95% CI, 2.6-5.1) for signet cell histology in rectal adenocarcinoma under age 40. Signet cell histology was also significantly associated with a more advanced stage at presentation, poorly differentiated tumor grade, and worse prognosis compared with mucinous and nonmucinous rectal adenocarcinoma. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective nature and the information available in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a stable incidence of rectal cancer for all ages, the incidence in patients under 40 has quadrupled since 1980, and cancers in this group are 3.6 times more likely to have signet cell histology. Given the worse outcomes associated with signet cell histology, these data highlight a need for thorough evaluation of young patients with rectal symptoms.

Early removal of urinary catheters after rectal surgery is associated with increased urinary retention.

BACKGROUND: Urinary retention after rectal resection is common and managed prophylactically by prolonging urinary catheterization. However, because indwelling urinary catheterization is a well-established risk factor for urinary tract infection, the ideal timing for urinary catheter removal following a rectal resection is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that early urinary catheter removal (on or before postoperative day 2) would be associated with urinary retention. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review of medical records. SETTING: This study was conducted at a colorectal surgery service at a tertiary care academic teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Adults undergoing rectal resection operations by colorectal surgeons in 2005 to 2010 were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome measured was urinary retention. RESULTS: Of 205 patients included, 41 (20%) developed urinary retention. Male sex (OR, 3.9; 95% CI, 1.7-9), increased intraoperative intravenous fluid (OR for each liter, 1.2; 95% CI, 1.04-1.48), and urinary catheter removal on postoperative day 2 or earlier (OR, 3.8; 95% CI, 1.4-10.5) were associated with urinary retention on multivariable analysis. Early catheter removal was not associated with decreased urinary tract infection rates (p = 0.29) but was associated with shorter length of stay (6.5 vs 8.9 days; p = 0.005). LIMITATIONS: The retrospective nature of this study did not allow for a precise definition of urinary retention. Preoperative urinary function was not available, and the patient sample was heterogeneous, including several indications for rectal resection. Urinary catheters were not removed per protocol and therefore subject to bias. The study is likely underpowered to detect differences in urinary tract infection between urinary catheter removal groups. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing rectal resection, we found that urinary catheter removal on or before postoperative day 2 was associated with urinary retention (see Video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A172).

Does patient rurality predict quality colon cancer care?: A population-based study.

BACKGROUND: More than 50 million people reside in rural America. However, the impact of patient rurality on colon cancer care has been incompletely characterized, despite its known impact on screening. OBJECTIVE: Our study sought to examine the impact of patient rurality on quality and comprehensive colon cancer care. DESIGN: We constructed a retrospective cohort of 123,129 patients with stage 0 to IV colon cancer. Rural residence was established based on the patient medical service study area designated by the registry. SETTINGS: The study was conducted using the 1996-2008 California Cancer Registry. PATIENTS: All of the patients diagnosed between 1996 and 2008 with tumors located in the colon were eligible for inclusion in this study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Baseline characteristics were compared by rurality status. Multivariate regression models then were used to examine the impact of rurality on stage in the entire cohort, adequate lymphadenectomy in stage I to III disease, and receipt of chemotherapy for stage III disease. Proportional-hazards regression was used to examine the impact of rurality on cancer-specific survival. RESULTS: Of all of the patients diagnosed with colon cancer, 18,735 (15%) resided in rural areas. Our multivariate models demonstrate that rurality was associated with later stage of diagnosis, inadequate lymphadenectomy in stage I to III disease, and lower likelihood of receiving chemotherapy for stage III disease. In addition, rurality was associated with worse cancer-specific survival. LIMITATIONS: We could not account for socioeconomic status directly, although we used insurance status as a surrogate. Furthermore, we did not have access to treatment location or distance traveled. We also could not account for provider or hospital case volume, patient comorbidities, or complications. CONCLUSIONS: A significant portion of patients treated for colon cancer live in rural areas. Yet, rural residence is associated with modest differences in stage, adherence to quality measures, and survival. Future endeavors should help improve care to this vulnerable population (see video, Supplemental Digital Content 1, http://links.lww.com/DCR/A143).

Pursestring closure of the stoma site leads to fewer wound infections: results from a multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection after stoma reversal is common. The optimal skin closure technique after stoma reversal has been widely debated in the literature. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that pursestring near-complete closure of the stoma site would lead to fewer surgical site infections compared with conventional primary closure. DESIGN: This study was a parallel prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at 2 university medical centers. PATIENTS: Patients (N = 122) presenting for elective colostomy or ileostomy reversal were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Pursestring versus conventional primary closure of stoma sites were compared. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Stoma site surgical site infection within 30 days of surgery, overall surgical site infection, delayed healing (open wound for >30 days), time to wound epithelialization, and patient satisfaction were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: The pursestring group had a significantly lower stoma site infection rate (2% vs 15%, p = 0.01). There was no difference in delayed healing or patient satisfaction between groups. Time to epithelialization was measured in only 51 patients but was significantly longer in the pursestring group (34.6 ± 20 days vs 24.1 ± 17 days, p = 0.02). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the variability in procedures and surgeons, the limited follow-up after 30 days, and the inability to perform blinding. CONCLUSION: Pursestring closure after stoma reversal has a lower risk of stoma site surgical site infection than conventional primary closure, although wounds may take longer to heal with the use of this approach. REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01713452 (www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Operative report teaching and synoptic operative reports: a national survey of surgical program directors.

BACKGROUND: Although operative report documentation (ORD) is an essential skill for surgeons and is evolving with electronic health records (EHRs), little is known about current ORD teaching in surgical training. STUDY DESIGN: An electronic survey was sent out in January 2012 to all 1,096 ACGME surgical program directors that assessed characteristics of training programs, EHR adoption, ORD education, synoptic or templated report usage for ORD, and attitudes and opinions about ORD education and electronic tools for ORD. Content thematic analysis of qualitative responses was performed iteratively until reaching saturation. RESULTS: Overall, 441 program directors (40%; 17.9 ± 8.8 years in practice) responded from university-affiliated (383 [87%]), community/private (44 [10%]), and military (14 [3%]) programs. Although most (n = 295 [67%]) consider ORD teaching a priority, only 76 (17%) programs provide ORD instruction. Program directors formally trained in ORD were more likely to offer ORD instruction (61% vs 11%; p < 0.0001), as were obstetrics/gynecology programs (obstetrics/gynecology 35% vs surgery 18%, neurosurgery 16%, ophthalmology 14%, orthopaedics 14%; p < 0.05 each). Although EHR adoption and electronically available operative reports were common (91%), besides ophthalmology (31%) and obstetrics/gynecology (30%) programs, ORD with synoptic reporting was used in only 18% of programs overall. Program directors perceived major barriers to ORD instruction and synoptic reporting for ORD. CONCLUSIONS: Although most program directors consider ORD teaching an educational priority, incongruence exists between its perceived value and its adoption into surgical training. Operative report documentation with synoptic reporting is currently not common in most surgical subspecialties.

Readmission after colorectal surgery is related to preoperative clinical conditions and major complications.

BACKGROUND: Hospital readmission is increasingly perceived as a marker of quality and is poorly investigated in patients receiving colorectal surgery. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe patterns and etiology of readmission, to determine the rate of readmission, and to identify risk factors for readmission after colorectal surgery. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective medical chart review. Significant (p < 0.1) preoperative and perioperative factors associated with readmission on univariate analysis were examined in a multivariable model. SETTING: The investigation was conducted in a tertiary care hospital. PATIENTS: Patients included adults undergoing major colorectal operations by colorectal surgeons at the University of Minnesota in 2008-2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was hospital readmission at 60 days. RESULTS: The study included 220 patients. Common surgical indications were inflammatory bowel disease (21%), colorectal cancer (39%), and diverticular disease (13%), and 11% were emergencies. Readmissions at 60 days occurred in 25% (n = 54), mostly because of major complications (57%), nonspecific nausea, vomiting and/or pain (18%), dehydration (11%), and wound infections (11%). Predictors of readmission in multivariable analysis were major complications (OR, 13.0), female sex (OR, 5.9), prednisone use (OR, 4.3), BMI ≥30 (OR, 2.6), and preoperative weight loss (OR, 3.4). Age and comorbidity (Charlson score) were not predictors. LIMITATIONS: This was a retrospective study at a single institution, with a small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Predictors of readmission were major complications and immediate preoperative condition of the patients. Comorbidity profiling does not capture readmission risk. Because most readmissions relate to complications, further efforts to prevent these will improve readmission rates.

Continuous intraoperative temperature measurement and surgical site infection risk: analysis of anesthesia information system data in 1008 colorectal procedures.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association between intraoperative temperature and surgical site infection (SSI) in colorectal surgery with anesthesia information system data. METHODS: Continuously measured intraoperative anesthesia information system temperature data for adult abdominal colorectal surgery procedures at a large tertiary center for 1 year were linked to 30-day American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program SSI outcomes. Univariable and multivariable analyses of SSI to descriptive temperature statistics, absolute and relative temperature threshold times, and other clinically relevant variables were performed. RESULTS: Overall, 1008 patients (48% female, median age: 53 years) underwent major colorectal procedures (7% emergent, 72% open, 173 ± 95 minutes mean procedure time) with median intraoperative temperature 36.0°C, using active rewarming in 92% and 1-hour presurgical antibiotic administration in 91%. Thirty-day overall and organ/space infection rates were 17.4% (175) and 8.5% (86). Maximum, minimum, ending, and median temperatures were similar for those with or without SSI (36.6°C vs 36.5°C, 34.9°C vs 35.0°C, 36.4°C vs 36.2°C, and 36.1°C vs 36.0°C, P = not significant) and percent minutes using incremental cutoffs failed to correlate SSI with temperature. Absolute minutes for higher temperature cutoffs correlated with SSI because of longer procedure times. On multivariable analysis, factors associated with SSI were preoperative diabetes [odds ratio: 1.81 (1.07-3.07), P = 0.022] and blood loss of more than 500 mL [odds ratio: 1.61 (1.01-2.58), P = 0.047]. CONCLUSIONS: Although active rewarming remains an accepted and valid process measure, highly granular anesthesia information system temperature data did not demonstrate a correlation between temperature measures and SSI. SSI prevention efforts should focus on more efficacious interventions as opposed to currently mandated publicly reported normothermia measures.

Are right-sided colectomy outcomes different from left-sided colectomy outcomes?: study of patients with colon cancer in the ACS NSQIP database.

IMPORTANCE: Optimization of surgical outcomes after colectomy continues to be actively studied, but most studies group right-sided and left-sided colectomies together. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the complication rate differs between right-sided and left-sided colectomies for cancer. As a secondary analysis, we investigated hospital length of stay. DESIGN: We identified patients who underwent colectomy for colon cancer in the 2005-2008 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database and stratified cases by right and left side. Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative factors were compared. Multivariable techniques were used to assess the impact of the side of colectomy on operative outcome measures, adjusting for covariates. SETTING: Hospitals within the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. PATIENTS: We identified 4875 patients who underwent elective laparoscopic or open colectomy for right-sided or left-sided colon cancer in the database. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Major complications and surgical site infection (SSI) rates. RESULTS: In the 4875 colectomies studied, a laparoscopic approach was used in 42% of cases and at similar frequency in right-sided and left-sided colectomies. Thirty-day mortality (1.5%) was similar in both groups. Major complications were seen in 17% of patients in each group. Superficial SSI was more likely to occur in patients who underwent left-sided colectomy (8.2% vs 5.9%). Among patients with postoperative sepsis or deep or organ space SSIs, more patients in the left-sided colectomy group underwent reoperation compared with the right-sided colectomy group (56% vs 30%). Laparoscopic right-sided colectomy patients were more likely to have a prolonged hospital length of stay than laparoscopic left-sided colectomy patients (odds ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.09-1.78). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The outcomes after colectomy for cancer are comparable in right-sided and left-sided resections, except for in the case of superficial SSI, which is less common in right-sided resections. Further research on SSI after colectomy should incorporate right vs left side as a potential preoperative risk factor.

Abdominal wall thickness: is it associated with superficial and deep incisional surgical site infection after colorectal surgery?

BACKGROUND: Colorectal surgical procedures have a high rate of surgical site infection (SSI), and obesity has been implicated as a predictor of such infection. We hypothesized that abdominal wall thickness (AWT), as a metric of obesity, would predict postoperative superficial and deep incisional SSI after colorectal surgery, and conducted a study to assess superficial and deep incisional SSI and its relationship to abdominal wall thickness. METHODS: To measure pre-operative AWT through cross-sectional imaging, and to analyze its relationship to SSI, we conducted a retrospective study at a single academic medical center of patients who had had colorectal resection for any indication in 2008 and 2009. RESULTS: We identified 143 patients for inclusion in the study. Superficial or deep incisional SSI occurred in 43 patients (30%). Abdominal wall thickness at the midpoint between the umbilicus and pubis was associated with SSI (OR 1.03; p=0.014). Body-mass index (BMI) was also significantly associated with SSI (OR 1.08; p=0.014). Other significant (p<0.05) predictors of SSI by univariate analysis included a history of soft tissue infection, a surgical wound classification of 3 or 4, and lack of compliance with perioperative antibiotic guidelines. In a multivariable analysis of factors that were statistically significantly associated with SSI in univariate comparisons, lack of appropriate preoperative antibiotic administration independently predicted SSI (OR 4.33; 95% CI 1.08-17.40), but AWT and BMI were not significantly associated with SSI. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical site infection is common after colorectal surgery. Increased AWT predicts SSI by univariate analysis. Our findings could guide further studies of interventions that may decrease the risk of SSIs in patients with a thick abdominal wall.

Percutaneous drainage of colonic diverticular abscess: is colon resection necessary?

BACKGROUND: Recurrent diverticulitis has been reported in up to 30% to 40% of patients who recover from an episode of colonic diverticular abscess, so elective interval resection is traditionally recommended. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to review the outcomes of patients who underwent percutaneous drainage of colonic diverticular abscess without subsequent operative intervention. DESIGN: This was an observational study. SETTINGS: This investigation was conducted at a tertiary care academic medical center and a single-hospital health system. PATIENTS: Patients treated for symptomatic colonic diverticular abscess from 2002 through 2007 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were complications, recurrence, and colectomy-free survival. RESULTS: Two hundred eighteen patients underwent percutaneous drainage of colonic diverticular abscesses. Thirty-two patients (15%) did not undergo subsequent colonic resection. Abscess location was pelvic (n = 9) and paracolic (n = 23), the mean abscess size was 4.2 cm, and the median duration of percutaneous drainage was 20 days. The comorbidities of this group of patients included severe cardiac disease (n = 16), immunodeficiency (n = 7), and severe pulmonary disease (n = 6). Freedom from recurrence at 7.4 years was 0.58 (95% CI 0.42-0.73). All recurrences were managed nonoperatively. Recurrence was significantly associated with an abscess size larger than 5 cm. Colectomy-free survival at 7.4 years was 0.17 (95% CI 0.13-0.21). LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by its retrospective, nonexperimental design and short follow-up. CONCLUSION: In selected patients, observation after percutaneous drainage of colonic diverticular abscess appears to be a safe and low-risk management option.

Does enrollment in cancer trials improve survival?

BACKGROUND: Stakeholders derive many benefits from cancer clinical trials, including guidance for future oncologic treatment decisions. However, whether enrollment in cancer trials also improves patient survival independently of trial outcomes remains underinvestigated. We hypothesized that cancer trial enrollment is not associated with patient survival outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Using the 2002 to 2008 California Cancer Registry, we identified 555,469 patients with stage I to IV solid organ tumors. Baseline characteristics were compared by trial participation status. Logistic regression determined predictors of trial enrollment. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression examined the impact of trial participation on overall and cancer-specific mortality with adjustment for covariates. RESULTS: Only 0.33% of our cohort was enrolled in clinical trials. Trial participants were likely to be younger than 65 (odds ratio [OR] 2.13; 95% CI 1.90 to 2.38), Hispanic rather than non-Hispanic white (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.67 to 0.90), and have breast cancer (OR 3.14; 95% CI 2.62 to 3.77). Multivariate survival analyses demonstrated that enrollment in cancer trials predicted a lower hazard of death. However, when stratified by disease site, this survival benefit was observed only in lung, colon, and breast cancers. Sensitivity and interaction analyses confirmed these relationships. CONCLUSIONS: In this first population-based study examining trial effect in solid organ cancers, enrollment into cancer trials predicted lower overall and cancer-specific mortality among common cancer sites. Although these findings may demonstrate a survival benefit due to trial enrollment, they likely also reflect the favorable attributes of trial enrollees. Once corroborated, stakeholders must consider broader cancer trial designs representative of the cancer burden treated in the real world.

Adjuvant chemotherapy for stage III colon cancer in the oldest old: results beyond clinical guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Randomized trials demonstrating the benefits of chemotherapy in patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer stage III colon cancer underrepresent persons aged ≥ 75 years. The generalizability of these studies to a growing elderly population remains unknown. METHODS: Using the California Cancer Registry for 1994 through 2008, the authors conducted a population-based study of postcolectomy patients aged 50 years to 94 years with stage III (N1M0) colon adenocarcinoma. A 2-sided chi-square test and Cochran-Armitage test for trend were used to compare patient and tumor characteristics associated with receipt of chemotherapy across age groups. Multivariate regression was used to assess the association between older age and receipt of chemotherapy. Kaplan-Meier methods and Cox proportional hazards modeling were used to evaluate the association between chemotherapy and mortality, with propensity score adjustment. RESULTS: Approximately 44% (12,382 patients) of the study cohort was aged ≥ 75 years. Persons aged ≥ 75 years were found to be less likely to have received adjuvant chemotherapy than those aged < 75 years (30% vs 68% in patients aged 50 years-74 years; P < .0001). On multivariate analysis, patients aged 75 years to 84 years were 13 times less likely, and those aged 85 years to 94 years were 24 times less likely, to have received chemotherapy as patients aged 50 years to 64 years. Nevertheless, age-stratified multivariate survival analyses indicated that chemotherapy provided comparable mortality reduction across age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of persons aged ≥ 75 years receiving adjuvant chemotherapy remains low despite demonstrated survival benefits. These findings deserve attention within the context of a patient's life expectancy, underlying comorbidities, and performance status, as well as clinician bias. The results of the current study support the call for phase II/III studies assessing the toxicities and benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy for the treatment of stage III colon cancer in the elderly.