Differences in preoperative frailty assessment of surgical candidates by sex, age, and race.

Introduction: Surgical decision-making often relies on a surgeon's subjective assessment of a patient's frailty status to undergo surgery. Certain patient demographics can influence subjective judgment when compared to validated objective assessments. In this study, we explore the relationship between subjective and objective frailty assessments according to patient age, sex, and race. Methods: Patients were prospectively enrolled in urology, general surgery, and surgical oncology clinics. Using a visual analog scale (0-100), operating surgeons independently rated the patient's frailty status. Objective frailty was classified using the Fried Frailty Criteria ranging from 0 to 5. Multivariable proportional odds models were conducted to examine the potential association of factors with objective frailty, according to surgeon frailty rating. Subgroup analysis according to patient sex, race, and age was also performed. Results: Seven male surgeons assessed 203 patients preoperatively with a median age of 65. A majority of patients were male (61 %), white (67 %), and 60 % and 40 % underwent urologic and general surgery/surgical oncology procedures respectively. Increased subjective surgeon rating (OR 1.69; p < 0.001) was significantly associated with the presence of objective frailty. On subgroup analysis, a higher magnitude of such association was observed more in females (OR 1.86; p = 0.0007), non-white (OR 1.84; p = 0.0019), and older (>60, OR 1.75; p = 0.0001) patients, compared to male (OR 1.45; p = 0.0243), non-white (OR 1.48; p = 0.0109) and patients under 60 (OR 1.47; p = 0.0823). Conclusion: The surgeon's subjective assessment of frailty demonstrated tendencies to rate older, female, and non-white patients as frail; however, differences in patient sex, age, and race were not statistically significant.

Establishing a culture of highly reliable quality care.

Reliability is the likelihood that a process will perform a required function without failure, consistent over time and personnel changes. In the rapidly evolving healthcare landscape, reliably delivering excellent surgical care demands a comprehensive and systematic approach. Accomplishing this task is beyond the reach of any individual clinician, administrator, or leader. The team must work together to establish a highly reliable quality care culture that serves as the foundation for safe, patient-centered practice. High reliability thus inherently relies on transdisciplinary collaboration, with every level of clinical, administrative, and regulatory team members actively communicating, supporting each other, and building trust in each other's expertise. Here, we discuss the fundamentals of establishing a highly reliable quality care culture. We outline the key principles of a highly reliable organization - preoccupation with failure, sensitivity to operations, reluctance to oversimplify, commitment to resilience, and deference to expertise - and the characteristics of teams that can effectively implement these principles. We discuss the importance of standardization, continuous process and outcome measurement, and setting collective goals. And finally, we exemplify these fundamentals through a brief case study. In outlining these foundational concepts for today's care, we also look forward to the impact of big data, artificial intelligence, and interconnectedness on our future continuous quality improvement efforts. Within the myriad complexities of surgical care, there are bound to be adverse outcomes, but by instilling a culture of highly reliable quality care, we can do our best to minimize their frequency, mitigate their harm, and optimize outcomes.

Use of Perioperative Advanced Practice Providers to Reduce Cost and Readmission in the Postoperative Hepatopancreatobiliary Population: Results of a Simulation Study.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative healthcare use and readmissions are common among the hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) population. We evaluated the surgical volume required to sustain advanced practice providers (APPs) in the perioperative setting for cost reduction. STUDY DESIGN: Using decision analysis modeling, we evaluated costs of employing dedicated perioperative APP navigators compared with no APPs navigators. Simulated subjects could: (1) present to an emergency department, with or without readmission, (2) present for direct readmission, (3) require additional office visits, or (4) require no additional care. We informed our model using the most current available published data and performed sensitivity analyses to evaluate thresholds under which dedicated perioperative APP navigators are beneficial. RESULTS: Subjects within the APP navigator cohort accumulated $1,270 and a readmission rate of 6.9%, compared with $2,170 and 13.5% with no APP navigators, yielding a cost savings of $905 and 48% relative reduction in readmission. Based on these estimated cost savings and national salary ranges, a perioperative APPs become financially self-sustaining with 113 to 139 annual HPB cases, equating to 2 to 3 HPB cases weekly. Sensitivity analyses revealed that perioperative APP navigators were no longer cost saving when direct readmission rates exceeded 8.9% (base case 3.7%). CONCLUSIONS: We show that readmissions are reduced by nearly 50% with an associated cost savings of $900 when employing dedicated perioperative APPs. This position becomes financially self-sufficient with an annual HPB case load of 113 to 139 cases. High-volume HPB centers could benefit from postdischarge APP navigators to optimize outcomes, minimize high-value resource use, and ultimately save costs.

Improving Statewide Post-Operative Sepsis Performance Measurement Using Hospital Risk Adjustment Within a Surgical Collaborative.

Background: The Georgia Quality Improvement Program (GQIP) surgical collaborative participating hospitals have shown consistently poor performance in the post-operative sepsis category of National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data as compared with national benchmarks. We aimed to compare crude versus risk-adjusted post-operative sepsis rankings to determine high and low performers amongst GQIP hospitals. Patients and Methods: The cohort included intra-abdominal general surgery patients across 10 collaborative hospitals from 2015 to 2020. The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) sepsis definition was used among all hospitals for case abstraction and NSQIP data were utilized to train and validate a multivariable risk-adjustment model with post-operative sepsis as the outcome. This model was used to rank GQIP hospitals by risk-adjusted post-operative sepsis rates. Rankings between crude and risk-adjusted post-operative sepsis rankings were compared ordinally and for changes in tertile. Results: The study included 20,314 patients with 595 cases of post-operative sepsis. Crude 30-day post-operative sepsis risk among hospitals ranged from 0.81 to 5.11. When applying the risk-adjustment model which included: age, American Society of Anesthesiology class, case complexity, pre-operative pneumonia/urinary tract infection/surgical site infection, admission status, and wound class, nine of 10 hospitals were re-ranked and four hospitals changed performance tertiles. Conclusions: Inter-collaborative risk-adjusted post-operative sepsis rankings are important to present. These metrics benchmark collaborating hospitals, which facilitates best practice exchange from high to low performers.

Generalizability of COBRA: A Parsimonious Perioperative Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment Model.

INTRODUCTION: Standardized use of venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk assessment models (RAMs) in surgical patients has been limited, in part due to the cumbersome workflow addition required to use available models. The COBRA score-capturing cancer diagnosis, (old) age, body mass index, race, and American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status score-has been reported as a potentially automatable VTE RAM that circumvents the cumbersome workflow addition that most RAMs represent. We aimed to test the ability of the COBRA model to effectively risk-stratify patients across various populations. METHODS: Patients were included from the 2014-2019 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) Participant Use Data File for two hospitals, representing colorectal, endocrine, breast, transplant, plastic, and general surgery services. COBRA score was calculated for each patient using preoperative characteristics. We calculated negative predictive value (NPV) for VTE outcomes and compared the COBRA score to NSQIP's expected VTE rate for all patients, between the two hospitals, and between subspecialty service lines. RESULTS: Of the 10,711 patients included, those with COBRA <4 (31%) had projected median VTE rate of 0.21% (interquartile range, 0.09-0.68%; mean, 0.54%). Patients with higher scores (69%) had median rate of 0.88% (0.26-2.07%; 1.46%); relative rate 2.7. The median projected VTE rates for patients identified as low risk were 0.21% and 0.16% and as high risk were 0.87% and 0.89% at hospitals one and 2, respectively. The median projected VTE rates for patients identified as low risk were 0.17%, 0.61%, and 0.08% and as high risk were 0.52%, 1.43%, and 0.18% among general, colorectal, and endocrine surgery patients, respectively. COBRA had NPV of 0.995 and sensitivity of 0.871 as compared to NPV 0.997 and sensitivity 0.857 of the NSQIP model. CONCLUSIONS: The COBRA score is concordant with the traditional gold standard NSQIP VTE RAM and demonstrates interhospital and service-specific generalizability, although performance was limited in especially low-risk patients. The model adequately risk-stratifies surgical patients preoperatively, potentially providing clinical decision support for perioperative workflows.

The financial impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on sleeve gastrectomy at a major academic institution.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19- pandemic significantly impacted metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) practices due to large-scale surgery cancellations along with staff and supply shortages. We analyzed sleeve gastrectomy (SG) hospital-level financial metrics before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Hospital cost-accounting software (MicroStrategy, Tysons, VA) was reviewed for revenues, costs, and profits per SG at an academic hospital (2017-2022). Actual figures were obtained, not insurance charge estimates or hospital projections. Fixed costs were obtained through surgery-specific allocation of inpatient hospital and operating-room costs. Direct variable costs were analyzed with sub-components including: (1) labor and benefits, (2) implants, (3) drug costs, and 4) medical/surgical supplies. The pre-COVID-19 period (10/2017-2/2020) and post-COVID-19 period (5/2020-9/2022) financial metrics were compared with student's t-test. Data from 3/2020 to 4/2020 were excluded due to COVID-19-related changes. RESULTS: A total of 739 SG patients were included. Average length of stay (LOS), Center for Medicaid and Medicare Case Mix Index (CMI), and percentage of patients with commercial insurance were similar pre vs. post-COVID-19 (p > 0.05). There were more SG performed per quarter pre-COVID-19 than post-COVID-19 (36 vs. 22; p = 0.0056). Pre-COVID-19 and post-COVID-19 financial metrics per SG differed significantly for, respectively, revenues ($19,134 vs. $20,983) total variable cost ($9457 vs. $11,235), total fixed cost ($2036 vs. $4018), total profit ($7571 vs. $5442), and labor and benefits cost ($2535 vs. $3734; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The post-COVID-19 period was characterized by significantly increased SG fixed cost (i.e., building maintenance, equipment, overhead) and labor costs (increased contract labor), resulting in precipitous profit decline that crosses the break-even in calendar year quarter (CQ) 3, 2022. Potential solutions include minimizing contract labor cost and decreasing LOS.

Does CPT Modifier 22 Appropriately Reflect a Difficult Pancreaticoduodenectomy? Retrospective Analysis of Operative Outcomes and Cost.

BACKGROUND: CPT coding allows addition of a 2-digit modifier code to denote particularly difficult procedures necessitating additional reimbursement, called the modifier 22. The use of modifier 22 in relation to pancreatic surgery and outcomes, specifically pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD), has not been explored. STUDY DESIGN: All PDs performed from 2010 to 2019 at a quaternary healthcare system were analyzed for differences in preoperative characteristics, outcomes, and cost based on the use of modifier 22. Adjusted logistic regression analysis was used to identify factors predictive of modifier 22 use. RESULTS: A total of 1,284 patients underwent PD between 2010 and 2019; 1,173 with complete data were included, of which 320 (27.3%) were coded with modifier 22. Patients coded with modifier 22 demonstrated a significantly longer duration of surgery (365.9 ± 168.4 vs 227 ± 97.1; p < 0.001). They also incurred significantly higher cost of index admission ($37,446 ± 34,187 vs $28,279 ± 27,980; p = 0.002). An adjusted multivariable analysis (specifically adjusted for surgeon variation) revealed duration of surgery (p < 0.001), neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.039), class II obesity (p = 0.019), and chronic pancreatitis (p = 0.005) to be predictive of modifier 22 use. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the subjective nature of this CPT modifier, modifier 22 is an appropriate marker of intraoperative difficulty. Preoperative and intraoperative characteristics that lead to its addition may be used to further delineate difficult PDs.

Implications of leukocytosis following distal pancreatectomy splenectomy (DPS) and association with postoperative complications.

BACKGROUND: Early identification of complications after distal pancreatectomy splenectomy (DPS) poses challenges, as white blood cell count (WBC) is confounded by physiologic leukocytosis. We examined WBC patterns associated with complications after DPS. METHODS: Clinicopathologic data were collected for patients who underwent DPS in our system from 2009 to 2016. We examined WBC, temperature, platelet count (PC), and ratios of these variables as potential early indicators of patients at risk of infections or major complications (MCs). RESULTS: 348 patients met study inclusion, of whom 206 (59%) were women and the median patient age was 59 ± 15 years. Infectious and MC rates were 11% and 16%, respectively, with <1% 30-day mortality. Postoperative WBC peaks were higher in patients with infections and MCs compared with no complication (23 vs. 17, p < 0.0001). WBC peak timing occurred postoperative day (POD) 2-3 for uncomplicated cases while peaks occurred POD9 for patients with infections and MCs. DISCUSSION: These data define patterns of leukocytosis following DPS. Although differences in infection markers were identified for patients with and without complications, no obvious thresholds were identified. Clinical suspicion for complications after DPS remains our best tool for early identification.

Georgia Quality Improvement Programs Multi-Institutional Collection of Postoperative Opioid Data Using ACS-NSQIP Abstraction.

BACKGROUND: Excessive postoperative opioid prescribing contributes to opioid misuse throughout the US. The Georgia Quality Improvement Program (GQIP) is a collaboration of ACS-NSQIP participating hospitals. GQIP aimed to develop a multi-institutional opioid data collection platform as well as understand our current opioid-sparing strategy (OSS) usage and postoperative opioid prescribing patterns. METHODS: This study was initiated 7/2019, when 4 custom NSQIP variables were developed to capture OSS usage and postoperative opioid oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). After pilot collection, our discharge opioid variable required optimization for adequate data capture and was expanded from a free text option to 4 drop-down selection variables. Data collection then continued from 2/2020-5/2021. Logistic regression was used to determine associations with OSS usage. Average OMEs were calculated for common general surgery procedures and compared to national guidelines. RESULTS: After variable optimization, the percentage where a total discharge prescription OME could be calculated increased from 26% to 70% (P < .001). The study included 820 patients over 10 operations. There was a significant variation in OSS usage between GQIP centers. Laparoscopic cases had higher odds of OSS use (1.92 (1.38-2.66)) while OSS use had lower odds in black patients on univariate analysis (.69 (.51-.94)). On average 7 out of the 10 cases had higher OMEs prescribed compared to national guidelines recommendations. CONCLUSION: Developing a multi-institutional opioid data collection platform through ACS-NSQIP is feasible. Preselected drop-down boxes outperform free text variables. GQIP future quality improvement targets include variation in OSS use and opioid overprescribing.

Effects of patients' hospital discharge preferences on uptake of clinical decision support.

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services identified unplanned hospital readmissions as a critical healthcare quality and cost problem. Improvements in hospital discharge decision-making and post-discharge care are needed to address the problem. Utilization of clinical decision support (CDS) can improve discharge decision-making but little is known about the empirical significance of two opposing problems that can occur: (1) negligible uptake of CDS by providers or (2) over-reliance on CDS and underuse of other information. This paper reports an experiment where, in addition to electronic medical records (EMR), clinical decision-makers are provided subjective reports by standardized patients, or CDS information, or both. Subjective information, reports of being eager or reluctant for discharge, was obtained during examinations of standardized patients, who are regularly employed in medical education, and in our experiment had been given scripts for the experimental treatments. The CDS tool presents discharge recommendations obtained from econometric analysis of data from de-identified EMR of hospital patients. 38 clinical decision-makers in the experiment, who were third and fourth year medical students, discharged eight simulated patient encounters with an average length of stay 8.1 in the CDS supported group and 8.8 days in the control group. When the recommendation was "Discharge," CDS uptake of "Discharge" recommendation was 20% higher for eager than reluctant patients. Compared to discharge decisions in the absence of patient reports: (i) odds of discharging reluctant standardized patients were 67% lower in the CDS-assisted group and 40% lower in the control (no-CDS) group; whereas (ii) odds of discharging eager standardized patients were 75% higher in the control group and similar in CDS-assisted group. These findings indicate that participants were neither ignoring nor over-relying on CDS.

A scalable tool for adjudication of time sensitive cases during COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, prioritization of care and utilization of scarce resources are daily considerations in healthcare systems that have never experienced these issues before. Elective surgical cases have been largely postponed, and surgery departments are struggling to correctly and equitably determine which cases need to proceed. A resource to objectively prioritize and track time sensitive cases would be useful as an adjunct to clinical decision-making. METHODS: A multidisciplinary working group at Emory Healthcare developed and implemented an adjudication tool for the prioritization of time sensitive surgeries. The variables identified by the team to form the construct focused on the patient's survivability according to actuarial data, potential impact on function with delay in care, and high-level biology of disease. Implementation of the prioritization was accomplished with a database design to streamline needed communication between surgeons and surgical adjudicators. All patients who underwent time sensitive surgery between 4/10/20 and 6/15/20 across 5 campuses were included. RESULTS: The primary outcomes of interest were calculated patient prioritization score and number of days until operation. 1767 cases were adjudicated during the specified time period. The distribution of prioritization scores was normal, such that real-time adjustment of the empiric algorithm was not required. On retrospective review, as the patient prioritization score increased, the number of days to the operating room decreased. This confirmed the functionality of the tool and provided a framework for organization across multiple campuses. CONCLUSIONS: We developed an in-house adjudication tool to aid in the prioritization of a large cohort of canceled and time sensitive surgeries. The tool is relatively simple in its design, reproducible, and data driven which allows for an objective adjunct to clinical decision-making. The database design was instrumental in communication optimization during this chaotic period for patients and surgeons.

Development of a Novel Preoperative Venous Thromboembolism Risk Assessment Model.

INTRODUCTION: Standardization of preoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk assessment remains challenging due to variation in risk assessment models (RAMs) and the cumbersome workflow addition that most RAMs represent. We aimed to develop a parsimonious RAM that is automatable and actionable within the preoperative workflow. METHODS: We performed a case-controlled review of all 18 VTE cases reported over a 12-month period and 171 matched controls included in an institutional National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP) data set. We examined the predictive value of the Caprini, Padua, and NSQIP RAMs. We identified the 5 most impactful risk factors in VTE development by contribution to the known RAMs. We compared the predictive ability of cancer, age, body mass index, black race, and American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) score, to the Caprini, Padua, and NSQIP RAMs for VTE outcomes. Finally, we evaluated concordance between each of the models. RESULTS: The Caprini Score was found to be 88.9% sensitive and 32.7% specific using a threshold of 5. The Padua score was found to be 61.1% sensitive and 47.4% specific using a threshold of 4. The novel 5-factor RAM was found to be 94.4% sensitive and 38.0% specific using a threshold of 4. The Caprini and Padua models were discordant in 26% of patients. DISCUSSION: Cumbersome manual data entry contributes to the ongoing challenge of standardized VTE risk assessment and prophylaxis. Universally documented information and patient demographics can be utilized to create clinical decision support tools that can improve the efficiency of perioperative workflow and improve the quality of care.

Reduction in Post-Discharge Return to Acute Care in Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery: Results of a Quality Improvement Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative returns to acute care represent fragmented care, are costly, and often evolve into readmission. Reduction of postoperative readmissions and emergency department visits represents an opportunity to improve quality of care and decrease resource use. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of 2 failure modes and effects analysis-guided quality improvement interventions on return to acute care within 30 days postoperatively. METHODS: An American College of Surgeons NSQIP database analysis of adult patients treated by a single hepatopancreatobiliary surgeon at a quaternary academic center was performed. Two failure modes and effects analysis-guided quality improvement interventions were assessed in a staged fashion, including a post-discharge phone call follow-up, and a preoperative clinic visit to discuss plans of care. The primary end point of interest was return to acute care (readmission or emergency department use) within 30 days from postoperative discharge. RESULTS: During the 4-year study period, 684 patients underwent a hepatopancreatobiliary operation. After the implementation of the failure modes and effects analysis interventions, the baseline 30-day readmission rate was reduced by 48% post intervention (13.5% vs 6.9%; p = 0.011). This impact was sustained, with a readmission rate below the lowest baseline in 5 of 6 postintervention quarters. Short-stay readmissions were reduced by > 76% after the interventions (28.5% vs 6.6%). Post-discharge emergency department visits were also reduced by nearly 40% after initiation of both failure modes and effects analysis-guided quality improvement interventions (11.3% vs 6.9%; p = 0.125), which showed similar sustained response. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this study can be used to help identify, develop, and test interventions to optimize emergency department use and readmission to reduce healthcare costs and improve patient quality of life.

Post-Pancreatectomy Diabetes Index: A Validated Score Predicting Diabetes Development after Major Pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Literature is varied regarding risk factors associated with diabetes development after major pancreatic resection. The aim was to develop and validate a scoring index that preoperatively predicts the development of diabetes after pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy. STUDY DESIGN: In this prospective study, perioperative fasting and postprandial (OGTT, oral glucose tolerance test) plasma glucose, glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), insulin, and c-peptide were measured in select consecutive patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy by the senior author, from 2007 to 2018. American Diabetes Association definitions were used for glycemic classifications. Statistical analyses included multivariate generalized estimated equation for factor identification and variable weighting; area under the receiver operating curve (ROC) c-statistic for predictive ability, and survival analysis risk score grouping. RESULTS: Of 1,083 included patients with preoperative normoglycemia (253; 23.4%), prediabetes (362; 33.4%), and diabetes (468; 43.2%), the overall postoperative incidence of each diabetic class at 120 months was 152 (14.0%), 466 (43.0%), and 465 (42.9%), respectively. The development and validation groups included 1,023 and 60 patients, respectively. Five factors were identified predicting diabetes development, with a total possible score of 8. The C-statistics for development and validation groups were 0.727 (CI 0.696 to 0.759, p < 0.001) and 0.823 (CI 0.718 to 0.928, p < 0.001), respectively. At a cut point of 3 (sensitivity 0.691, specificity 0.644) the Post-pancreatectomy Diabetes Index (PDI) independently predicted diabetes in development (odds ratio [OR] 4.298, relative risk [RR] 2.486, CI 1.238 to 5.704, p < 0.001) and validation (OR 6.970, RR 2.768, CI 2.182 to 22.261, p < 0.001) groups. The PDI similarly predicted pre-diabetes in development (OR 1.961, RR 1.325, CI 1.202 to 2.564, p < 0.001) and validation (OR 4.255, RR 1.798, CI 1.247 to 14.492, p = 0.021) groups. CONCLUSIONS: The Post-pancreatectomy Diabetes Index predicts the development of diabetes and pre-diabetes in patients undergoing major pancreatectomy using routine endocrine laboratories and pre-surgical clinical data.

The hidden costs of open hepatectomy: A 10-year, single institution series of right-sided hepatectomies.

BACKGROUND: Incisional ventral hernias(IVH) are a common complication following open abdominal surgery. The aim of this study was to uncover the hidden costs of IVH following right-sided hepatectomy. METHODS: Outcomes and hospital billing data for patients undergoing open(ORH) and laparoscopic right-sided hepatectomies(LRH) were reviewed from 2008 to 2018. RESULTS: Of 327 patients undergoing right-sided hepatectomies, 231 patients were included into two groups: ORH(n = 118) and LRH(n = 113). Median follow-up-times and time-to-hernia were 24.9-months(0.3-128.4 months) and 40.5-months(0.4-81.4 months), respectively. The incidence of hernias at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years was 6/231(2.6%), 13/231(5.6%), 15(6.5%), and 17/231(7.4%); ORH = 14, LRH = 3, p = 0.003), respectively. In terms of IVH repair(IVHR), total operative costs ($10,719.27vs.$4,441.30,p < 0.001) and overall care costs ($20,541.09vs.$7,149.21,p = 0.044) were significantly greater for patients undergoing ORH. Patients whom underwent ORHs had longer hospital stays and more complications following IVHR. Risk analysis identified ORH(RR-10.860), male gender(RR-3.558), BMI ≥30 kg/m2(RR-5.157), and previous abdominal surgery(RR-6.870) as predictors for hernia development (p < 0.030). CONCLUSION: Evaluation of pre-operative hernia risk factors and utilization of a laparoscopic approach to right-sided hepatectomy reduces incisional ventral hernia incidence and cost when repair is needed.