Development and design of a mobile application for prescription opioid clinical decision-making: a feasibility study in New York City, USA.

OBJECTIVES: Excessive opioid prescribing is a contributing factor to the opioid epidemic in the USA. We aimed to develop, implement and evaluate the usability of a clinical decision-making mobile application (app) for opioid prescription after surgery. METHODS: We developed two clinical decision trees, one for opioid prescription after adult laparoscopic cholecystectomy and one for posterior spinal fusion surgery in adolescents. We developed a mobile app incorporating the two algorithms with embedded clinical decision-making, which was tested by opioid prescribers. A survey collected prescription intention prior to app use and participants' evaluation. Participants included opioid prescribers for patients undergoing (1) laparoscopic cholecystectomy in adults or (2) posterior spinal fusion in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. RESULTS: Eighteen healthcare providers were included in this study (General Surgery: 8, Paediatrics: 10). Intended opioid prescription before app use varied between departments (General Surgery: 0-10 pills (mean=5.9); Paediatrics: 6-30 pills (mean=20.8)). Intention to continue using the app after using the app multiple times varied between departments (General Surgery: N=3/8; Paediatrics: N=7/10). The most reported reason for not using the app is lack of time. CONCLUSIONS: In this project evaluating the development and implementation of an app for opioid prescription after two common surgeries with different prescription patterns, the surgical procedure with higher intended and variable opioid prescription (adolescent posterior spinal fusion surgery) was associated with participants more willing to use the app. Future iterations of this opioid prescribing intervention should target surgical procedures with high variability in both patients' opioid use and providers' prescription patterns.

Shaves off the Cavity or Specimen in Lumpectomy for Breast Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Re-excision for positive margins (margins where tumor is positive) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) is common and burdensome for breast cancer patients. Routine shave margins can reduce positive margins and re-excision rates. Cavity shaving margin (CSM) removes margins from the lumpectomy cavity edges, whereas specimen shave margin (SSM) requires ex vivo removal of margins from the resected specimen. METHODS: We assessed breast cancer patients undergoing BCS who received CSM or SSM procedures from 2017 to 2019. CSM and SSM techniques were compared by analyzing positive rates of primary and final shaved margins, re-excision rates, and tissue volumes removed. RESULTS: Of 116 patients included in this study, 57 underwent CSM and 59 underwent SSM. Primary margins were positive or close in 19 CSM patients and 21 SSM patients (33% versus 36%; P = 0.798). Seventeen CSM patients had a tumor in shaved margin specimens, compared to four patients for SSM (30% versus 7%; P < 0.001); however, final shave margins were similar (5% versus 5%; P = 0.983). Volumes of shave specimens were higher with SSM (40.7 versus 13.4 cm3; P < 0.001), but there was no significant difference in the total volume removed (146.8 versus 134.4 cm3; P = 0.540). For tumors 2 cm or larger, the total volume removed (140 versus 206 cm3; P = 0.432) and rates of final margin positivity (7.5% versus 0%; P = 0.684) were similar for both techniques. CONCLUSIONS: CSM and SSM are effective techniques for achieving low re-excision rates. Our findings suggest that surgeons performing either CSM or SSM may maintain operative preferences and achieve similar results.

The Safety and Efficacy of Tracheostomy in Patients Diagnosed With COVID-19: An Analysis of 143 Patients at a Major NYC Medical Center.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the optimal surgical strategy for performing tracheostomy in COVID-19 patients. BACKGROUND: Many ventilated COVID-19 patients require prolonged ventilation. We do not know if tracheostomy will improve their care. Given the paucity of data on this topic, the optimal surgical approach has yet to be elucidated. METHODS: This is a cohort study of 143 ventilator dependent COVID-19 patients undergoing tracheostomy at an academic medical center from April 15th to May 15th, 2020, with follow up until June 1, 2020. We included adult patients admitted to a NYC medical center with COVID-19 who required invasive mechanical ventilation for greater than 2 weeks who were unable to be extubated and determined to have reasonable chance of recovery and fit defined tracheostomy candidate criteria. Patients underwent either a percutaneous tracheostomy (PT) or open surgical tracheostomy (ST) performed by 1 of 3 surgical services. RESULTS: One hundred forty-three patients underwent tracheostomy, 58 (41%) via a ST, and 85 (59%) via a PT. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics between the 2 groups, except that more patients who had a history of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation underwent PT (11% vs 2%, P = 0.049). There were no statistical differences observed between the PT and ST groups with regard to bleeding complications (3.5%vs 10.3%, P = 0.099), tracheostomy related complications (5.9% vs 8.6%, P = 0.528), inpatient death (12% vs 5%, P = 0.178), discharge from hospital (39% vs 36%, P = 0.751) or surgeon illness (0% vs 0%, P = 1). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The rapid formation of a multi-disciplinary team allows for the efficient evaluation and performance of a large volume of tracheostomies in a resource-limited setting. Bedside tracheostomy in COVID-19 does not cause additional harm to patients if performed after 2 weeks from intubation. It also seems to be safe for proceduralists to perform in this timeframe. The manner of tracheostomy does not change outcomes significantly if it is performed safely and efficiently.

Navigating the Infinite Number of Educational Resources: The Development of a Publicly Available Surgical Educational Digital Resource Library.

OBJECTIVE: There has been an explosion of digital resources available for general surgical education and board preparation. This makes it difficult for a new learner, regardless of their training level, to determine which resources best fit their needs. The uncertainty surrounding resource selection due to the large number of options causes stress, anxiety, and inefficiency for surgical learners. Our objective was to develop a digital surgical educational resource library to assist with selection. DESIGN: A needs assessment via multi-center focus groups encompassing all levels of learners from various subspecialties and training levels (medical students, trainees, junior surgeons, and senior surgeons) was performed to determine what information is desired in a surgical resource library. We conducted follow-up interviews and surveys to learn which resources were most commonly used for studying throughout training. SETTING: Multi-institutional RESULTS: The initial needs assessment detailed requests for an expansive array of surgical resources characterized by media type and price. We identified 104 resources that met these criteria. There were 33 resources used by medical students, 37 by residents, 16 used specifically for surgical boards preparation, and 25 by attending surgeons. These resources were composed of textbooks, review books, question banks, audio resources, video resources, and review courses. The prices of the resources ranged from free to greater than 400 dollars. CONCLUSIONS: A digital resource library should be broad and must address needs that change along a learner's career. Changes and improvements are required not only to meet the changing needs of the learners, but also to ensure the library remains current with the ever-growing number of resources. We plan to incorporate reviews of the resources from those surveyed to help visitors of the online library determine which resources may best suit their needs. Development of a digital resource library may assist learners by helping them easily identify what is available and has been peer reviewed allowing them to determine what best meets their educational needs.

Care Delivery Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Breast Cancer Care.

PURPOSE: COVID-19 has altered healthcare delivery. Previous work has focused on patients with cancer and COVID-19, but little has been reported on healthcare system changes among patients without COVID-19. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of patients with breast cancer (BC) in New York City between February 1, 2020, and April 30, 2020. New patients were included as were patients scheduled to receive intravenous or injectable therapy. Patients with COVID-19 were excluded. Demographic and treatment information were obtained by chart review. Delays and/or changes in systemic therapy, surgery, radiation, and radiology related to the pandemic were tracked, along with the reasons for delay and/or change. Univariate and multivariable analysis were used to identify factors associated with delay and/or change. RESULTS: We identified 350 eligible patients, of whom 149 (42.6%) experienced a delay and/or change, and practice reduction (51.0%) was the most common reason. The patients who identified as Black or African American, Asian, or Other races were more likely to experience a delay and/or change compared with White patients (Black, 44.4%; Asian, 47.1%; Other, 55.6%; White, 31.4%; P = .001). In multivariable analysis, Medicaid compared with commercial insurance (odds ratio [OR], 3.04; 95% CI, 1.32 to 7.27) was associated with increased odds of a delay and/or change, whereas stage II or III BC compared with stage I (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.15 to 0.95; and OR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.092, respectively) was associated with decreased odds of a delay and/or change. CONCLUSION: Almost half of the patients with BC without COVID-19 had a delay and/or change. We found racial and socioeconomic disparities in the likelihood of a delay and/or change. Further studies are needed to determine the impact these care alterations have on BC outcomes.

Medical Student Assessment in the Time of COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Medical student education in the era of the COVID-19 outbreak is vastly different than the standard education we have become accustomed to. Medical student assessment is an important aspect of adjusting curriculums in the era of increased virtual learning. METHODS: Students took our previously validated free response clinical skills exam (CSE) at the end of the scheduled clerkship as an open-book exam to eliminate any concern for breaches in the honor code and then grades were adjusted based on historic norms. The National Board of Medical Examiners (NBME) shelf exam was taken with a virtual proctor. Students whose clerkship was affected by the COVID-19 pandemic were compared to the students from a similarly timed surgery block the previous 3 years. Primary outcomes included CSE and NBME exam scores. Secondary outcomes included clinical evaluations and the percentage of students who received grades of Honors, High Pass, and Pass. After the surgery clerkship was completed, we surveyed all students who participated in the surgery clerkship during the COVID-19 crisis. RESULTS: There were 19 students during the COVID-interrupted clerkship and 61 students in similarly timed clerkships between 2017 and 2019. Prior to adjustment and compared to historic scores, the COVID-interrupted clerkship group scored higher on the CSE, NBME exam, and performance evaluations (median, CSE:75.2 vs 68.7, shelf:68.0 vs 64.0, performance evaluation mean: 2.96 vs 2.78). The percentage of students with an honors was marginally higher in the group affected by COVID (42% vs 32%). Out of 19 students surveyed, 9 students responded. Seven students stated they would have preferred a closed-book CSE, citing a few drawbacks of the open-book format such as modifying their exam preparation, being discouraged from thinking prior to searching online during the test, and second guessing their answers. CONCLUSIONS: During the initial outbreak of COVID-19, we found that an open book exam and a virtually proctored shelf exam was a reasonable option. However, to avoid adjustments and student dissatisfaction, we would recommend virtual proctoring if available.

The Effect of Surgical Trainee Education on Opioid Prescribing: An International Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: Up to 6% of opioid naive patients who undergo surgery become chronic opioid users. The aim of this study was to determine if formal opioid prescribing education of general surgery residents is associated with decreased opioid prescribing postoperatively. METHODS: We surveyed surgery residents at 3 general surgery programs in the United States and 1 in Israel. Residents were divided into 2 groups based on whether or not they received formal opioid prescribing education. RESULTS: Of those surveyed, 107 (50%) responded. 45% of residents had formal opioid prescribing education, which included instructional videos, current literature, and hospital guidelines. For the 4 operations analyzed, residents who received no formal teaching prescribed a higher number of opioids (lumpectomy p = 0.001, open inguinal hernia repair p = 0.004, laparoscopic appendectomy p = 0.007, thyroidectomy p = 0.002). The largest difference in opioid prescribing was seen in "high prescribers," defined as residents prescribing 15 or more opioid pills. For thyroidectomy, 24.4% of residents without formal education prescribed 20 or more oxycodone 5mg pills compared to 0% of residents with formal education. The Israeli cohort was less likely to receive a pain focused education and was also less likely to prescribe opioids to their patients for all 4 procedures evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Although a minority of general surgery residents are receiving an opioid prescribing education, a formal educational program was associated with significantly decreased opioid prescribing. There is a need for a generalizable educational opioid program for surgery residents.

Surgical Education and the Longitudinal Model at the Columbia-Bassett Program.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to evaluate a longitudinal medical student surgical curriculum. DESIGN: This is a case-controlled study of students who participated in a longitudinal surgical curriculum compared to students who participated in a standard 12-week surgical clerkship. This study evaluates qualitative data including exam scores as well as qualitative data regarding student experience. SETTING: All students were from Columbia College of Physicians and Surgeons in New York City. A portion of the students completed their clerkship at the main university campus and others performed their clerkship at an affiliate site including Bassett Health Network. The longitudinal curriculum was only at the Bassett Health Network. PARTICIPANTS: All medical students who completed their surgical curriculum from 2012 to 2015 were eligible. The survey response rate was 45% for a total of 128 students. RESULTS: The students receiving the longitudinal curriculum outperformed the block students on the national shelf exam (77 vs 71, p = 0.001). The longitudinal students were also more likely to learn directly from attending surgeons and were more likely to have a greater interest in a surgical career after their surgery experience. CONCLUSIONS: The longitudinal approach to teaching surgery to medical students achieves non-inferior or superior testing outcomes when compared to the block model, and superior outcomes in terms of students' own attitudes and perceptions.

Renal Safety of Intravenous Ketorolac Use After Donor Nephrectomy.

INTRODUCTION: The benefit and short-term safety of ketorolac have been established in previous studies however, the risk of bleeding and long-term renal impairment in patients undergoing donor nephrectomy remain unclear. We report our experience at a high-volume transplant center. METHOD: Between January 1996 and January 2014, 862 consecutive patients underwent laparoscopic donor nephrectomy. Exclusion criteria included nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug allergy, asthma, bleeding disorders, long-term opioid use, intraoperative blood loss >700 mL, peptic ulcer disease, bleeding diathesis, and baseline creatinine greater than 1.9 mg/dL. Intravenous ketorolac was administered within 30 minutes following the surgical procedure at a dose of 15 to 30 mg every 6 hours. Patients were categorized into 2 groups according to the administration of ketorolac after surgery. Differences between the groups were analyzed. Primary outcomes were changes in serum creatinine and hemoglobin levels. Poor outcome was defined as postsurgical complications. RESULTS: During this time, 469 (55.3%) received ketorolac. The mean donor age was 39 years, and 360 (42.5%) were male. Left kidneys were procured in 82%. Operative time averaged 210 minutes and warm ischemia time117 seconds. Baseline demographic and operative outcomes were comparable in both groups. No statistically significant differences were found between the ketorolac group and the nonketorolac group in preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin levels and serum creatinine at 1 week, 1 year, and 5 years (P = .6). Ketorolac use was not associated with increased perioperative morbidity (P = NS). CONCLUSION: The use of intravenous ketorolac in patients undergoing donor nephrectomy was not associated with an increased risk of bleeding or renal impairment.

Outcomes of resection for solitary ≤5 cm intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Resection remains the treatment of choice achieving 5-year survival rates of 22% to 40%. The aim of this analysis was to examine the outcomes of patients with solitary ≤5 cm intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed on 123 patients undergoing resection for primary intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma from 1995 to 2013. Group 1 included patients with asymptomatic solitary intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma measuring ≤5 cm. RESULTS: Group 1 (n = 33, 27%) had a greater rate of underlying liver disease, cirrhosis, minor resection, favorable pathologic features including decreased rate of perineural invasion, vascular invasion, lymph node involvement, and satellite nodules (P < .05). Factors associated with overall poor outcome were patients in Group 2 (P=.025), positive margin (P=.04), presence of satellite nodules (P = .008), and multinodularity (P=.058). Factors associated with recurrence in Group 1 were presence of satellite nodules (P=.004), and tumor size ≥4 cm (P=.031). Factors associated with decreased survival in Group 1 was transfusion requirement (P = 0.018). The 5-year recurrence and survival rates were (39% vs 67%) and (71% vs 53%) in Group 1 versus Group 2, respectively (P=.111). CONCLUSION: Resection of solitary intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma ≤5 cm can achieve 5-year survival rates up to 71%. Results were comparable to those of patients undergoing transplantation for hepatocellular cancer within the Milan criteria.

Should patients With obstructing colorectal cancer have proximal diversion?

BACKGROUND: Up to 20% of patients with colorectal cancer present with obstruction. The goal of this study was to compare the short-term outcomes of patients with obstructing colon cancer who underwent resection and primary anastomosis with or without proximal diversion. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Procedure Targeted Colectomy databases from 2012 to 2014 were reviewed. Patients undergoing colorectal resection with or without diverting ostomy for obstructing colorectal cancer were analyzed. Propensity score-matched cohorts of diverted and nondiverted patients were created accounting for patient characteristics. The primary outcomes were 30-day mortality, postoperative complications, and readmission. RESULTS: There were 2,323 patients (92%) with no proximal diversion and 204 patients (8%) with proximal diversion. In univariate analysis, patients with colorectal resection with diversion were significantly more likely to have any complication (P = .001), sepsis (P = .01), and blood transfusion (P = .001). Diversion patients were also significantly more likely to be readmitted to the hospital within 30 days of the index procedure (P = .02). Proximal diversion was associated with any complication (P = .01), failure to wean off ventilator (P = .05), and longer length of stay (P = .01) in matched cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Proximal diversion in the setting of obstructive colorectal cancer is associated with higher rates of any complication, deep wound infection, sepsis, and readmission. Surgeons who perform a primary anastomosis with diversion for obstructing colorectal cancer should take into account the significant risk for postoperative complications.

Scoring System for the Management of Acute Gallstone Pancreatitis: Cost Analysis of a Prospective Study.

Predicting the presence of a persistent common bile duct (CBD) stone is a difficult and expensive task. The aim of this study is to determine if a previously described protocol-based scoring system is a cost-effective strategy. The protocol includes all patients with gallstone pancreatitis and stratifies them based on laboratory values and imaging to high, medium, and low likelihood of persistent stones. The patient's stratification then dictates the next course of management. A decision analytic model was developed to compare the costs for patients who followed the protocol versus those that did not. Clinical data model inputs were obtained from a prospective study conducted at The Mount Sinai Medical Center to validate the protocol from Oct 2009 to May 2013. The study included all patients presenting with gallstone pancreatitis regardless of disease severity. Seventy-three patients followed the proposed protocol and 32 did not. The protocol group cost an average of $14,962/patient and the non-protocol group cost $17,138/patient for procedural costs. Mean length of stay for protocol and non-protocol patients was 5.6 and 7.7 days, respectively. The proposed protocol is a cost-effective way to determine the course for patients with gallstone pancreatitis, reducing total procedural costs over 12 %.

Validation and improvement of a proposed scoring system to detect retained common bile duct stones in gallstone pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: In 2009, a study from our institution used retrospective data and multivariate analysis to identify 5 quantitative variables and their cutoffs that have a positive predictive value (PPV) for common bile duct (CBD) stones in gallstone pancreatitis. They also proposed a management protocol based on the scoring system. This prospective study sought to validate that scoring system. METHODS: From October 2009 to August 2013, patients with gallstone pancreatitis were enrolled in the study. Scores of 0-5 were determined at admission, with 1 point for each criterion met: CBD ≥ 9 mm, gamma glutamyltransferase ≥ 350 U/L, alkaline phosphatase ≥ 250 U/L, total bilirubin ≥ 3 mg/dL, and direct bilirubin ≥ 2 mg/dL. All CBDs were assessed using intraoperative cholangiogram, MR cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), or endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). RESULTS: Of 84 patients, 16 had CBD stones. A score of 0 had negative predictive value (NPV) of 100% for CBD stones (P < .001). Scores of 1 and 2 had NPV of 81% and 83%, respectively. A score of 3 had NPV of 60%. A score of 4 had PPV of 67% (P = .002). A score of 5 had PPV of 100% (P < .001). The overall accuracy of the scoring system was 88%. CONCLUSION: The scoring system is accurate in prediction of CBD stones in patients with gallstone pancreatitis. We propose that patients with 0 points undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy, 1 and 2 points undergo laparoscopic cholecystectomy with intraoperative cholangiogram, 3 and 4 points undergo MRCP, and 5 points undergo ERCP as the first step in management for gallstone pancreatitis. The proposed protocol eliminated negative ERCPs.