RESUMO
Background: Opioid prescribing guidelines have significantly decreased overprescribing and post-discharge use after cardiac surgery; however, limited recommendations exist for general thoracic surgery patients, a similarly high-risk population. We examined opioid prescribing and patient-reported use to develop evidence-based, opioid prescribing guidelines after lung cancer resection. Methods: This prospective, statewide, quality improvement study was conducted between January 2020 to March 2021 and included patients undergoing surgical resection of a primary lung cancer across 11 institutions. Patient-reported outcomes at 1-month follow-up were linked with clinical data and Society of Thoracic Surgery (STS) database records to characterize prescribing patterns and post-discharge use. The primary outcome was quantity of opioid used after discharge; secondary outcomes included quantity of opioid prescribed at discharge and patient-reported pain scores. Opioid quantities are reported in number of 5-mg oxycodone tablets (mean ± standard deviation). Results: Of the 602 patients identified, 429 met inclusion criteria. Questionnaire response rate was 65.0%. At discharge, 83.4% of patients were provided a prescription for opioids of mean size 20.5±13.1 pills, while patients reported using 8.2±13.0 pills after discharge (P<0.001), including 43.7% who used none. Those not taking opioids on the calendar day prior to discharge (32.4%) used fewer pills (4.4±8.1 vs. 11.7±14.9, P<0.001). Refill rate was 21.5% for patients provided a prescription at discharge, while 12.5% of patients not prescribed opioids at discharge required a new prescription before follow-up. Pain scores were 2.4±2.5 for incision site and 3.0±2.8 for overall pain (scale 0-10). Conclusions: Patient-reported post-discharge opioid use, surgical approach, and in-hospital opioid use before discharge should be used to inform prescribing recommendations after lung resection.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: In January 2016, our statewide quality improvement collaborative focused on 3 metrics of adequate lymph node harvest during lung cancer surgery: (1) rates of pathologic examination of 10 lymph nodes or more; (2) sampling 5 or more lymph node stations or more within the hilum or mediastinum; and (3) pathologic nodal upstaging (pathologic nodal stage higher than clinical nodal stage). Unblinded, hospital-level outcomes were presented at biannual meetings, and opportunities for education or improvement were discussed. We set out to describe this quality improvement initiative and the subsequent impact on surgical lymphadenectomies statewide. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients undergoing lobectomy for stage IA to IIIA non-small-cell lung cancer from July 2015 to December 2020 at the 16 participating centers. RESULTS: The study cohort included 3753 patients. The rates of examining 10 lymph nodes or more statewide increased from 215 lobectomies (44.0%) in 2015 to 522 lobectomies (78.9%) in 2020 (P < .001). Similar trends were noted statewide for 5 lymph node stations or more, which increased from 193 lobectomies (39.6%) to 531 lobectomies (80.3%) in 2020 (P < .001). The overall rate of nodal upstaging was more variable year to year and generally declined over time (P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Our statewide quality improvement initiative improved rates of appropriate lymph node staging for surgically treated non-small cell lung cancer compared with national rates. This work demonstrates the power that a "community of practice" philosophy can have on surgical treatment of lung cancer. Quality improvement interventions including transparent data-driven discussions and collaboration can help guide future quality improvement initiatives and should be readily transferrable to other clinical domains.