Worth the Risk? Standardized Screening to Identify Substance Use Among Patients Prior to Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare identification of unhealthy substance use before surgery using The Tobacco, Alcohol, Prescription Medication, and Other Substance Use (TAPS), a standardized 4-item instrument, versus routine clinical documentation in the electronic medical record (EHR). SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Over 20% of individuals exhibit unhealthy substance use before elective surgery. Routine EHR documentation is often based on non-standard questions that may not fully capture the extent of substance use and is subject to bias. In contrast, brief standardized screening could provide a more efficient and systematic approach. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional study among adults (≥18 y) at a preoperative clinic from August to September, 2021. Positive screens for unhealthy substances by TAPS were compared to data from the EHR. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy were reported. Receiver operating characteristic curves (ROCs) were used to assess diagnostic ability. Multivariable logistic regression was used to estimate the predictors of positive screens by TAPS. RESULTS: The cohort included 240 surgical patients. TAPS screening identified significantly more positive screens than EHR documentation (43.3% vs. 14.2%). Patients with unhealthy substance use were younger (50.8 vs. 56.7 y; P=0.003), and TAPS revealed alcohol misuse in 30.8% of cases, contrasting with 0% in clinician documentation (P<0.001). Of the 104 TAPS-positive patients, 69.2% were missed by EHR documentation. Sensitivity (31%) and accuracy (AUC=0.65) of clinician documentation for any unhealthy substance use were lower compared to TAPS. CONCLUSION: Standardized TAPS screening detected preoperative unhealthy substance use more frequently than routine clinician documentation, emphasizing the need for integrating standardized measures into surgical practice to ensure safer perioperative care and outcomes.

Correlation of Colorectal Surgical Skill With Patient Outcomes: A Cautionary Tale.

BACKGROUND: Previous work has demonstrated a correlation between video ratings of surgical skill and clinical outcomes. Some have proposed the use of video review for technical skill assessment, credentialing, and quality improvement. OBJECTIVE: Before its adoption as a quality measure for colorectal surgeons, we must first determine whether video-based skill assessments can predict patient outcomes among specialty surgeons. DESIGN: Twenty-one surgeons submitted one representative video of a minimally invasive colectomy. Each video was edited to highlight key steps and then rated by 10 peer surgeons using a validated American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons assessment tool. Linking surgeons' ratings to a validated surgical outcomes registry, we assessed the relationship between skill and risk-adjusted complication rates. SETTINGS: The study was conducted with the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, a statewide collaborative including 70 community, academic, and tertiary hospitals. PATIENTS: Patients included those who underwent minimally invasive colorectal resection performed by the participating surgeons. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Main outcome measures included 30-day risk-adjusted postoperative complications. RESULTS: The average technical skill rating for each surgeon ranged from 2.6 to 4.6. Risk-adjusted complication rate per surgeon ranged from 9.9% to 33.1%. Patients of surgeons in the bottom quartile of overall skill ratings were older and more likely to have hypertension or to smoke; patients of surgeons in the top quartile were more likely to be immunosuppressed or have an ASA score of 3 or higher. After patient- and surgery-specific risk adjustment, there was no statistically significant difference in complication rates between the bottom and top quartile surgeons (17.5% vs 16.8%, respectively, p = 0.41). LIMITATIONS: Limitations included retrospective cohort design with short-term follow-up of sampled cases. Videos were edited to highlight key steps, and reviewers did not undergo training to establish norms. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that video-based peer rating of minimally invasive colectomy was not correlated with postoperative complications among specialty surgeons. As such, the adoption of video review for use in credentialing should be approached with caution. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B802.CORRELACIÓN ENTRE LA HABILIDAD QUIRÚRGICA COLORRECTAL Y LOS RESULTADOS OBTENIDOS EN EL PACIENTE: RELATO PRECAUTORIOANTECEDENTES:Trabajos anteriores han demostrado una correlación entre la video-calificación de la habilidad quirúrgica y los resultados clínicos. Algunos autores han propuesto el uso de la revisión de videos para la evaluación de la habilidad técnica, la acreditación y la mejoría en la calidad quirúrgica.OBJETIVO:Antes de su adopción como medida de calidad entre los cirujanos colorrectales, primero debemos determinar si las evaluaciones de habilidades basadas en video pueden predecir los resultados clínicos de los pacientes entre cirujanos especializados.DISEÑO:Veintiún cirujanos enviaron un video representativo de una colectomía mínimamente invasiva. Cada video fue editado para resaltar los pasos clave y luego fué calificado por 10 cirujanos revisores utilizando una herramienta de evaluación validada por la ASCRS. Al vincular las calificaciones de los cirujanos al registro de resultados quirúrgicos aprobado, evaluamos la relación entre la habilidad y las tasas de complicaciones ajustadas al riesgo.AJUSTE:Colaboración en todo el estado incluyendo 70 hospitales comunitarios, académicos y terciarios, el Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative.PACIENTES:Todos aquellos sometidos a resección colorrectal mínimamente invasiva realizada por los cirujanos participantes.MEDIDA DE RESULTADO PRINCIPAL:Complicaciones posoperatorias ajustadas al riesgo a los 30 días.RESULTADOS:La calificación de la habilidad técnica promedio de cada cirujano osciló entre 2.6 y 4.6. La tasa de complicaciones ajustada al riesgo por cirujano osciló entre el 9,9% y el 33,1%. Los pacientes operados por los cirujanos del cuartil inferior de las calificaciones generales de habilidades eran fumadores y añosos, y tambiés más propensos a la hipertensión arterial. Los pacientes operados por los cirujanos del cuartil superior tenían más probabilidades de ser inmunosuprimidos o tener una puntuación ASA> = 3. Después del ajuste de riesgo específico de la cirugía y el paciente, no hubo diferencias estadísticamente significativas en las tasas de complicaciones entre los cirujanos del cuartil inferior y superior (17,5% frente a 16,8%, respectivamente, p = 0,41).LIMITACIONES:Diseño de cohortes retrospectivo con seguimiento a corto plazo de los casos muestreados. Los videos se editaron para resaltar los pasos clave y los revisores no recibieron capacitación para establecer normas.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestro estudio demuestra que la evaluación realizada por los revisores basada en el video de la colectomía mínimamente invasiva no se correlacionó con las complicaciones post-operatorias entre los cirujanos especialistas. Por tanto, la adopción de la revisión del video quirúrgico para su uso en la acreditación profesional, debe abordarse con mucha precaución. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B802. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

Uptake of Total Mesorectal Excision and Total Mesorectal Excision Grading for Rectal Cancer: A Statewide Study.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision is associated with decreased local recurrence and improved disease-free survival following rectal cancer resection. The extent to which total mesorectal excision has been adopted in the United States is unknown. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess trends in total mesorectal excision performance and grading in Michigan hospitals. DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study from the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Trends in total mesorectal excision performance and grade assignment were analyzed by using χ tests and linear regression. SETTINGS: Participating hospitals (initially 14 hospitals, now 38) abstracted medical records data for rectal cancer cases from 2007 to 2016. PATIENTS: Patients who underwent rectal cancer resection were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome measures were surgeon-documented total mesorectal excision performance and pathologist-reported total mesorectal excision grade. RESULTS: Of 510 rectal cancer cases, 367 (72.0%) had surgeon-reported total mesorectal excision performance and 78 (15.3%) had pathologist-reported total mesorectal excision grade. Between-hospital variability in total mesorectal excision performance ranged from 0% to 97% and total mesorectal excision grading ranged from 0% to 90%. Total mesorectal excision grading was associated with a higher likelihood of also having adequate lymph node assessment (88.5% versus 71.9%, p = 0.002). There has been a statistically significant trend toward an increase in total mesorectal excision grading in the original 14 hospitals (p = 0.001), but not in the complete cohort of all hospitals (p = 0.057). LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective cohort design with sampled rectal cancer cases. In addition, there is insufficient granularity to capture all factors associated with total mesorectal excision performance or grade assignment. CONCLUSIONS: The rates of total mesorectal excision performance and grade assignment are widely variable throughout the state of Michigan. Overall, grade assignment remains very low. This suggests an opportunity for quality improvement projects to increase total mesorectal excision performance and grading, involving both the surgeons and pathologists for effective implementation. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B53. IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE LA ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL Y LA CLASIFICACIÓN POR ESCISIÓN MESORRECTAL TOTAL PARA EL CÁNCER RECTAL: UN ESTUDIO A NIVEL ESTATAL.: La escisión mesorrectal total se asocia con una menor recurrencia local y una mejor supervivencia libre de enfermedad después de la resección del cáncer rectal. Se desconoce hasta que punto se ha adoptado la escisión mesorrectal total en los Estados Unidos.Se intento evaluar las tendencias en el rendimiento y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total en los hospitales de Michigan.Este es un estudio de cohorte retrospectivo de la "Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative". Las tendencias en el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total y la asignación de grado se analizaron mediante pruebas de chi-cuadrada y regresión lineal.Los hospitales participantes (inicialmente 14 hospitales, ahora 38) extrajeron datos de registros médicos de los casos de cáncer rectal desde 2007 hasta 2016.Pacientes que se sometieron a resección de cáncer rectal.Las principales medidas de resultado fueron el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total documentado por el cirujano y el grado de escisión mesorrectal total informada por el patólogo.De 510 casos de cáncer rectal, 367 (72.0%) tenían un rendimiento de escisión mesorrectal total reportado por el cirujano y 78 (15.3%) tenían un grado de escisión mesorrectal total reportado por el patólogo. La variabilidad entre hospitales en el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total varió del 0 al 97% y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total varió del 0 al 90%. La clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total se asoció con una mayor probabilidad de tener también una evaluación adecuada de los ganglios linfáticos (88.5% versus 71.9%, p = 0.002). Ha habido una tendencia estadísticamente significativa hacia un aumento en la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total en los 14 hospitales originales (p = 0.001), pero no en la cohorte completa de todos los hospitales (p = 0.057).Diseño de cohorte retrospectivo con casos de cáncer rectal muestreados. Además, no hay suficiente granularidad para capturar todos los factores asociados con el rendimiento de la escisión mesorrectal total o la asignación de grados.Las tasas de rendimiento de escisión mesorrectal total y asignación de grado son muy variables en todo el estado de Michigan. En general, la asignación de calificaciones sigue siendo muy baja. Esto sugiere una oportunidad para que los proyectos de mejora de la calidad aumenten el rendimiento y la clasificación de la escisión mesorrectal total, involucrando tanto a los cirujanos como a los patólogos para una implementación efectiva. Vea el resumen del video en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B53.

Are perioperative bundles associated with reduced postoperative morbidity in women undergoing benign hysterectomy? Retrospective cohort analysis of 16,286 cases in Michigan.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare teams that frequently follow a bundle of evidence-based processes provide care with lower rates of morbidity. Few process bundles to improve surgical outcomes in hysterectomy have been identified. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether a bundle of 4 perioperative care processes is associated with fewer postoperative complications and readmissions for hysterectomies in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. STUDY DESIGN: A bundle of perioperative care process goals was developed retrospectively with 30-day peri- and postoperative outcome data from the Hysterectomy Initiative in Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. All benign hysterectomies that had been performed between January 2013 and January 2015 were included. Based on evidence of lower complication rates after benign hysterectomy, the following processes were considered to be the "bundle": use of guideline-appropriate preoperative antibiotics, a minimally invasive surgical approach, operative duration <120 minutes, and avoidance of intraoperative hemostatic agent use. Each process was considered present or absent, and the number of processes was summed for a bundle score that ranged from 0-4. Cases with a score of zero were excluded. Outcomes measured were rates of complications (any and major) and hospital readmissions, all within 30 days of surgery. Postoperative events that were considered a "major complication" included acute renal failure, cardiac arrest that required cardiopulmonary resuscitation, central line infection, cerebral vascular accident, death, deep vein thrombosis, intestinal obstruction, myocardial infarction, pelvic abscess, pulmonary embolism, rectovaginal fistula, sepsis, surgical site infection (deep and organ-space), unplanned intubation, ureteral obstruction, and ureterovaginal and vesicovaginal fistula. The outcome "any complication" included all those events already described in addition to blood transfusion within 72 hours of surgery, urinary tract infection, and superficial surgical site infection. Outcomes were adjusted for patient demographics, surgical factors, and hospital-level clustering effects. RESULTS: There were 16,286 benign hysterectomies available for analysis. Among all hysterectomies that were reviewed, 33.6% met criteria for all bundle processes; however, there was wide variation in the rate among the 56 hospitals in the study sample with 9.1% of cases at the lowest quartile and 60.4% at the highest quartile of hospitals that met criteria for all bundle processes. Overall, the rate of any complication was 6.8% and of any major complication was 2.3%. The rate of hospital readmissions was 3.6%. After adjustment for confounders, in cases in which all bundle criterion were met compared with cases in which all bundle criterion were not met, the rate of any complications increased from 4.3-7.8% (P<.001); major complications increased from 1.7-2.6% (P<.001), and readmissions increased from 2.6-4.1% (P<.001). After adjustment for confounders, hospitals with greater rates of meeting all 4 criteria were associated significantly with lower hospital-level rates of postoperative complications (P<.001) and readmissions (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This multiinstitutional evaluation reveals that reduced morbidity and readmission are associated with rates of bundle compliance. The proposed bundle is a surgical goal, which is not possible in every case, and there is significant variation in the proportion of cases meeting all 4 bundle processes in Michigan hospitals. Implementation of evidence-based process bundles at a healthcare system level are worthy of prospective study to determine whether improvements in patient outcomes are possible.

Perioperative Opioid-Related Harms: Opportunities to Minimize Risk.

Although substantial attention has been given to opioid prescribing in the United States, opioid-related mortality continues to climb due to the rising incidence and prevalence of opioid use disorder. Perioperative care has an important role in the consideration of opioid prescribing and the care of individuals at risk for poor postoperative pain- and opioid-related outcomes. Opioids are effective for acute pain management and commonly prescribed for postoperative pain. However, failure to align prescribing with patient need can result in overprescribing and exacerbate the flow of unused opioids into communities. Conversely, underprescribing can result in the undertreatment of pain, complicating recovery and impairing well-being after surgery. Optimizing pain management can be particularly challenging for individuals who are previously exposed to opioids or have critical risk factors, including opioid use disorder. In this review, we will explore the role of perioperative care in the broader context of the opioid epidemic in the United States, and provide considerations for a multidisciplinary, comprehensive approach to perioperative pain management and optimal opioid stewardship.