Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Pancreatic Cancer: A Comparative Analysis of Ontario and the USA.

BACKGROUND: Comparative studies evaluating quality of care in different healthcare systems can guide reform initiatives. This study seeks to characterize best practices by comparing utilization and outcomes for patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) in the USA and Ontario, Canada. METHODS: Patients (age ≥ 66 years) with PC were identified from the Ontario Cancer Registry and SEER-Medicare databases from 2006 to 2015. Demographics and treatment (surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, or multimodality (surgery and chemotherapy)) were described. In resected patients, neoadjuvant therapy, readmission, and 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality rates were calculated. Survival was assessed using Kaplan-Meier curves. RESULTS: This study includes 38,858 and 11,512 patients with PC from the USA and Ontario, respectively. More female patients were identified in the USA (54.0%) versus Ontario (46.9%). In the entire cohort, US patients received more radiation in addition to other therapies (18.8% vs. 13.5% Ontario) and chemotherapy alone (34.3% vs. 19.0% Ontario). While rates of resection were similar (13.4% USA vs.12.5% Ontario), multimodality therapy was more common in the UAS (9.0% vs. 6.4%). Among resected patients, neoadjuvant chemotherapy was uncommon in both groups, although more frequent in the USA (12.0% vs. 3.2% Ontario). The 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality rates were lower in Ontario vs. the USA (30-day: 3.26% vs. 4.91%; 90-day: 7.08% vs. 10.96%), however, overall survival was similar between the USA and Ontario. CONCLUSIONS: We observed substantive differences in treatment and outcomes between PC patients in the USA and Ontario, which may reflect known differences in healthcare systems. Close evaluation of healthcare policies can inform initiatives to improve care quality.

Adapting Surgical Coaching: Feasibility and Perceptions of Intraoperative Resident Peer Coaching.

INTRODUCTION: Surgical coaching is utilized to enhance technical, nontechnical, and teaching skills. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and benefit of a resident peer coaching program. METHODS: Chief residents (postgraduate year 5) acted as coaches for junior residents (postgraduate year 1-3, "coachees"). All participants completed the Harvard Surgical Coaching for Operative Performance Enhancement curriculum. The coaching structure included 1) preoperative goal setting, 2) unscrubbed intraoperative observation, and 3) postoperative debrief. Upon completion, residents were surveyed to assess their experience. Descriptive and thematic analyses were performed. RESULTS: There were 22 participants (6 coaches, 16 coachees). Five (83.3%) coaches and 14 (87.5%) coachees reported the program was useful, citing dedicated reflection outside the operating room, in-depth feedback, and structured self-assessment with increased accountability. Thirteen (81.3%) coachees reported perceived improvement in technical skills and 12 (75%) within nontechnical skills. All coaches felt they benefited and improved their ability to provide feedback. When asked how coaching compared to usual methods of operative feedback, 14 (87.5%) coachees and 5 (83.3%) coaches reported it was better, with only 1 coachee reporting it was worse. Benefits over typical operating room teaching included more feedback provided, more specific feedback, and the benefit of peer relationships. Twelve (54.5%) residents cited difficulty with coordinating sessions, but 21 (95.5%) reported that they would participate again. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a resident peer surgical coaching program is feasible. Both coaches and coachees perceive significant benefit with improvement in technical, nontechnical, and feedback delivery skills. Given preference over other methods of operative feedback, expansion of peer coaching programs is warranted.