A Qualitative Study of the Work Systems and Culture Around End-of-Day Intraoperative Anesthesia Handoffs in a Tertiary Care Center.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative handoffs have been implicated as a contributing factor in many perioperative adverse events. Despite conflicting data around their impact on perioperative outcomes, they remain a vulnerable point in the perioperative system with significant attention focused on improving them. This study aimed to understand the processes in place surrounding the point of information transfer in intraoperative handoffs. METHODS: We used semistructured interviews with anesthesia clinicians to understand the processes and systems surrounding intraoperative handoffs. Interview data were coded deductively using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model as a framework, with subthemes developed inductively. RESULTS: Clinicians do a significant amount of work before and after the point of information transfer to ensure a smooth handoff and safe patient care. Despite not having standardization of handoffs, most clinicians have a typical handoff organization and largely agree on content that should be included. However, there is variability based on clinician and patient characteristics, including clinician discipline and patient acuity. These handoffs are additionally impacted by the overall culture in the operating room, including the teamwork and hierarchies present among the surgical and anesthesia teams. Finally, the broader operating room logistics, including scheduling practices for surgical cases and anesthesia teams, impact the quality of intraoperative handoffs and the ability of clinicians to prepare for these handoffs. CONCLUSIONS: Handoffs involve processes beyond the point of information transfer and are embedded in the systems and culture of the operating rooms. These considerations are important when seeking to improve the quality of intraoperative handoffs.

A systematic review of patient-reported outcome measures to assess postpartum pain using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines.

BACKGROUND: We performed a systematic review using Consensus Based Standards for the Selection of Health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidelines to identify the best available patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) of postpartum pain. METHODS: This review follows COSMIN guidelines. We searched four databases with no date limiters, for previously identified validated PROMs used to assess postpartum pain. PROMs evaluating more than one author-defined domain of postpartum pain were assessed. We sought studies evaluating psychometric properties. An overall rating was then assigned based upon COSMIN analysis, and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the level of evidence for psychometric properties of included PROMs. These assessments were used to make recommendations and identify the best PROM to assess postpartum pain. RESULTS: We identified 19 studies using seven PROMs (involving 3511 women), which evaluated postpartum pain. All included studies evaluated ≥1 psychometric property of the included PROMs. An adequate number of pain domains was assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), Short Form-BPI (SF-BPI), and McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ). The SF-BPI was the only PROM to demonstrate adequate content validity and at least a low-level of evidence for sufficient internal consistency, resulting in a Class A recommendation (the best performing instrument, recommended for use). CONCLUSION: SF-BPI is the best currently available PROM to assess postpartum pain. However, it fails to assess several important domains and only just met the criteria for a Class A recommendation. Future studies are warranted to develop, evaluate, and implement a new PROM designed to specifically assess postpartum pain.

Incidence of Acute Complications Following Surgery for Syndactyly and Polydactyly: An Analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database from 2012 to 2014.

PURPOSE: Congenital hand differences are infrequent phenomena, and their treatment represents a relatively small fraction of cases performed by hand surgeons. Little is known about the incidence of wound complications and acute postoperative problems given the relative rarity of these procedures. This study sought to characterize the incidence of complications within 30 days of surgery for congenital hand differences. METHODS: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) contains prospective data regarding 30-day morbidity from 64 pediatric centers across the United States. Data from all available years (2012-2014) were queried for Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes pertinent to the treatment of congenital hand differences. Bivariate statistics, Fisher exact tests and Poisson 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) were used to assess the incidence of complications and examine risk factors for these outcomes. RESULTS: We identified a total of 1,656 congenital hand cases that represented 4 different CPT codes, including surgery for simple syndactyly, complex syndactyly, and polydactyly. The overall incidence of complications was 2.2% (95% CI, 1.6%-3.1%; n = 37) with the most common complication being superficial surgical site infection (1.7%; 95% CI, 1.1%-2.4%) followed by related readmission (0.3%; 95% CI, 0.1%-0.7%). There was a higher incidence of complications observed in patients undergoing complex syndactyly repair (5.2% for complex syndactyly repair vs 2.3% for all others). CONCLUSIONS: The rate of acute complications following procedures to correct syndactyly and polydactyly is low, the most common of which is superficial surgical site infection. The incidence of acute complications may be helpful in counseling patients and families. We suggest that further research must prioritize collecting data on long-term functional outcomes. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic II.