Going beyond compliance: A qualitative study of the practice of surgical safety checklist.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a tool designed to enhance team communication and patient safety. When used properly, the SSC acts as a layer of defence against never events. In this study, we performed secondary qualitative analysis of operating theatres (OT) SSC observational notes to examine how the SSC was used after an intensive SSC re-implementation effort and drew on relevant theories to shed light on the observed patterns of behaviours. We aimed to go beyond assessing checklist compliance and to understand potential sociopsychological mechanisms of the variations in SSC practices. METHODS: Direct observation notes of 109 surgical procedures across 13 surgical disciplines were made by two trained nurses in the OT of a large tertiary hospital in Singapore from February to April 2022, three months after SSC re-implementation. Only notes relevant to the use of SSC were extracted and analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Data were coded following an inductive process to identify themes or patterns of SSC practices. These patterns were subsequently interpreted against a relevant theory to appreciate the potential sociopsychological forces behind them. RESULTS: Two broad types of SSC practices and their respective sub-themes were identified. Type 1 (vs. Type 2) SSC practices are characterized by patience and thoroughness (vs. hurriedness and omission) in carrying out the SSC process, dedication and attention (vs. delegation and distraction) to the SSC safety checks, and frequent (vs. absence of) safety voices during the conduct of SSC. These patterns were conceptualized as safety-seeking action vs. ritualistic action using Merton's social deviance theory. CONCLUSION: Ritualistic practice of the SSC can undermine surgical safety by creating conditions conducive to never events. To fully realize the SSC's potential as an essential tool for communication and safety, a concerted effort is needed to balance thoroughness with efficiency. Additionally, fostering a culture of collaboration and collegiality is crucial to reinforce and enhance the culture of surgical safety.

CheckPOINT: a simple tool to measure Surgical Safety Checklist implementation fidelity.

INTRODUCTION: The WHO Surgical Safety Checklist (SSC) is a communication tool that improves teamwork and patient outcomes. SSC effectiveness is dependent on implementation fidelity. Administrative audits fail to capture most aspects of SSC implementation fidelity (ie, team communication and engagement). Existing research tools assess behaviours during checklist performance, but were not designed for routine quality assurance and improvement. We aimed to create a simple tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity, and to test its reliability using video simulations, and usability in clinical practice. METHODS: The Checklist Performance Observation for Improvement (CheckPOINT) tool underwent two rounds of face validity testing with surgical safety experts, clinicians and quality improvement specialists. Four categories were developed: checklist adherence, communication effectiveness, attitude and engagement. We created a 90 min training programme, and four trained raters independently scored 37 video simulations using the tool. We calculated intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) to assess inter-rater reliability (ICC>0.75 indicating excellent reliability). We then trained two observers, who tested the tool in the operating room. We interviewed the observers to determine tool usability. RESULTS: The CheckPOINT tool had excellent inter-rater reliability across SSC phases. The ICC was 0.83 (95% CI 0.67 to 0.98) for the sign-in, 0.77 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.92) for the time-out and 0.79 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.99) for the sign-out. During field testing, observers reported CheckPOINT was easy to use. In 98 operating room observations, the total median (IQR) score was 25 (23-28), checklist adherence was 7 (6-7), communication effectiveness was 6 (6-7), attitude was 6 (6-7) and engagement was 6 (5-7). CONCLUSIONS: CheckPOINT is a simple and reliable tool to assess SSC implementation fidelity and identify areas of focus for improvement efforts. Although CheckPOINT would benefit from further testing, it offers a low-resource alternative to existing research tools and captures elements of adherence and team behaviours.

Transforming Team Performance Through Reimplementation of the Surgical Safety Checklist.

Importance: Patient safety interventions, like the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist, require effective implementation strategies to achieve meaningful results. Institutions with underperforming checklists require evidence-based guidance for reimplementing these practices to maximize their impact on patient safety. Objective: To assess the ability of a comprehensive system of safety checklist reimplementation to change behavior, enhance safety culture, and improve outcomes for surgical patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective type 2 hybrid implementation-effectiveness study took place at 2 large academic referral centers in Singapore. All operations performed at either hospital were eligible for observation. Surveys were distributed to all operating room staff. Intervention: The study team developed a comprehensive surgical safety checklist reimplementation package based on the Exploration, Preparation, Implementation, Sustainment framework. Best practices from implementation science and human factors engineering were combined to redesign the checklist. The revised instrument was reimplemented in November 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Implementation outcomes included penetration and fidelity. The primary effectiveness outcome was team performance, assessed by trained observers using the Oxford Non-Technical Skills (NOTECH) system before and after reimplementation. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Hospital Survey on Patient Safety Culture was used to assess safety culture and observers tracked device-related interruptions (DRIs). Patient safety events, near-miss events, 30-day mortality, and serious complications were tracked for exploratory analyses. Results: Observers captured 252 cases (161 baseline and 91 end point). Penetration of the checklist was excellent at both time points, but there were significant improvements in all measures of fidelity after reimplementation. Mean NOTECHS scores increased from 37.1 to 42.4 points (4.3 point adjusted increase; 95% CI, 2.9-5.7; P < .001). DRIs decreased by 86.5% (95% CI, -22.1% to -97.8%; P = .03). Significant improvements were noted in 9 of 12 composite areas on culture of safety surveys. Exploratory analyses suggested reductions in patient safety events, mortality, and serious complications. Conclusions and Relevance: Comprehensive reimplementation of an established checklist intervention can meaningfully improve team behavior, safety culture, patient safety, and patient outcomes. Future efforts will expand the reach of this system by testing a structured guidebook coupled with light-touch implementation guidance in a variety of settings.

Clinical Features vs CT Findings to Estimate Need for Surgery in Small Bowel Obstruction.

This comparative effectiveness research compares the ability of clinical features vs clinical features with computed tomography (CT) to estimate the need for small bowel obstruction surgery.

Defining the emergency general surgery patient population in the era of ICD-10 : Evaluating an established crosswalk from ICD-9 to ICD-10 diagnosis codes.

INTRODUCTION: In 2015, the United States moved from the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision ( ICD-9 ), to the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision ( ICD-10 ), coding system. The American Association for the Surgery of Trauma Committee on Severity Assessment and Patient Outcomes previously established a list of ICD-9 diagnoses to define the field of emergency general surgery (EGS). This study evaluates the general equivalence mapping (GEM) crosswalk to generate an equivalent list of ICD-10 -coded EGS diagnoses. METHODS: The GEM was used to generate a list of ICD-10 codes corresponding to the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma ICD-9 EGS diagnosis codes. These individual ICD-9 and ICD-10 codes were aggregated by surgical area and diagnosis groups. The volume of patients admitted with these diagnoses in the National Inpatient Sample in the ICD-9 era (2013-2014) was compared with the ICD-10 volumes to generate observed to expected ratios. The crosswalk was manually reviewed to identify the causes of discrepancies between the ICD-9 and ICD-10 lists. RESULTS: There were 485 ICD-9 codes, across 89 diagnosis categories and 11 surgical areas, which mapped to 1,206 unique ICD-10 codes. A total of 196 (40%) ICD-9 codes have an exact one-to-one match with an ICD-10 code. The median observed to expected ratio among the diagnosis groups for a primary diagnosis was 0.98 (interquartile range, 0.82-1.12). There were five key issues identified with the ability of the GEM to crosswalk ICD-9 EGS diagnoses to ICD-10 : (1) changes in admission volumes, (2) loss of necessary modifiers, (3) lack of specific ICD-10 code, (4) mapping to a different condition, and (5) change in coding nomenclature. CONCLUSION: The GEM provides a reasonable crosswalk for researchers and others to use when attempting to identify EGS patients in with ICD-10 diagnosis codes. However, we identify key issues and deficiencies, which must be accounted for to create an accurate patient cohort. This is essential for ensuring the validity of policy, quality improvement, and clinical research work anchored in ICD-10 coded data. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Test/Criteria; Level III.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Consensus Guidelines for Emergency Laparotomy Part 3: Organizational Aspects and General Considerations for Management of the Emergency Laparotomy Patient.

BACKGROUND: This is Part 3 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy using an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses organizational aspects of care. METHODS: Experts in management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. RESULTS: Components of organizational aspects of care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi process. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on best current available evidence for organizational aspects of an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy and include discussion of less common aspects of care for the surgical patient, including end-of-life issues. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Consensus Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society Recommendations Part 2-Emergency Laparotomy: Intra- and Postoperative Care.

BACKGROUND: This is Part 2 of the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL) using an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) approach. This paper addresses intra- and postoperative aspects of care. METHODS: Experts in aspects of management of high-risk and emergency general surgical patients were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Medline database searches were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and large cohort studies and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on elective patients when appropriate. A modified Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. Some ERAS® components covered in other guideline papers are outlined only briefly, with the bulk of the text focusing on key areas pertaining specifically to EL. RESULTS: Twenty-three components of intraoperative and postoperative care were defined. Consensus was reached after three rounds of a modified Delphi Process. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on best available evidence for an ERAS® approach to patients undergoing EL. These guidelines are not exhaustive but pull together evidence on important components of care for this high-risk patient population. As much of the evidence is extrapolated from elective surgery or emergency general surgery (not specifically laparotomy), many of the components need further evaluation in future studies.

Early surgery for perforated appendicitis: Are we moving the needle on postoperative abscess?

BACKGROUND: Perforated appendicitis is often managed nonoperatively though upfront surgery is becoming more common. We describe postoperative outcomes for patients undergoing surgery at their index hospitalization for perforated appendicitis. METHODS: We used the 2016-2020 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database to identify patients with appendicitis who underwent appendectomy or partial colectomy. The primary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI). RESULTS: 132,443 patients with appendicitis underwent immediate surgery. Of 14.1% patients with perforated appendicitis, 84.3% underwent laparoscopic appendectomy. Intra-abdominal abscess rates were lowest after laparoscopic appendectomy (9.4%). Open appendectomy (OR 5.14, 95% CI 4.06-6.51) and laparoscopic partial colectomy (OR 4.60, 95% CI 2.38-8.89) were associated with higher likelihoods of SSIs. CONCLUSIONS: Upfront surgical management of perforated appendicitis is now predominantly approached by laparoscopy, often without bowel resection. Postoperative complications occurred less frequently with laparoscopic appendectomy compared to other approaches. Laparoscopic appendectomy during the index hospitalization is an effective approach to perforated appendicitis.

Predictors of care discontinuity in geriatric trauma patients.

BACKGROUND: Readmission to a non-index hospital, or care discontinuity, has been shown to have worse outcomes among surgical patients. Little is known about its effect on geriatric trauma patients. Our goal was to determine predictors of care discontinuity and to evaluate its effect on mortality in this geriatric population. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of Medicare inpatient claims (2014-2015) of geriatric trauma patients. Care discontinuity was defined as readmission within 30 days to a non-index hospital. Demographic and clinical characteristics (including readmission diagnosis category) were collected. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to identify predictors of care discontinuity and to assess its association with mortality. RESULTS: We included 754,313 geriatric trauma patients. Mean age was 82.13 years (SD, 0.50 years), 68% were male and 91% were White. There were 21,615 (2.87%) readmitted within 30 days of discharge. Of these, 34% were readmitted to a non-index hospital. Overall 30-day mortality after readmission was 25%. In unadjusted analysis, readmission to index hospitals was more likely to be due to surgical infection, GI complaints, or cardiac/vascular complaints. After adjusted analysis, predictors of care discontinuity included readmission diagnoses, patient- and hospital-level factors. Care discontinuity was not associated with mortality (OR, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-1.01). CONCLUSION: More than a third of geriatric trauma patients are readmitted to a non-index hospital, which is driven by readmission diagnosis, travel time and hospital characteristics. However, unlike other surgical settings, this care discontinuity is not associated with increased mortality. Further work is needed to understand the reasons for this and to determine which standardized processes of care can benefit this population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level IV.

Implementation of a Device Briefing Tool reduces interruptions in surgery: A nonrandomized controlled pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Interruptions in operative flow are known to increase team stress and errors in the operating room. Device-related interruptions are an increasing area of focus for surgical safety, but common safety processes such as the Surgical Safety Checklist do not adequately address surgical devices. We assessed the impact of the Device Briefing Tool, a communication instrument for surgical teams, on device-related interruptions in a large academic referral center in Singapore. METHODS: The Device Briefing Tool was implemented in 4 general surgery departments, with 4 additional departments serving as a comparator group. Trained observers evaluated device-related interruption incidence in live operations at baseline and after implementation. Changes in device-related interruption frequency were assessed in each group using Poisson regression, with and without adjustment for surgical department and device complexity. Subgroup analyses assessed the impact of the Device Briefing Tool by device type. RESULTS: A total of 210 operations were evaluated by observers. In the Device Briefing Tool group, there were 38.6 and 27.2 device-related interruptions per 100 cases at baseline and after Device Briefing Tool implementation, respectively (difference -23%, P = .0047, adjusted difference -28%, P = .0013). Device-related interruption frequency in the comparator group remained stable across study periods. Point estimates indicated reductions in device-related interruptions for all device types, reaching statistical significance for circular staplers (-26%, P = .0049). CONCLUSION: Implementation of the Device Briefing Tool was associated with a 28% reduction in device-related interruptions. Proactive approaches to improving surgical device safety are crucial in the technology-driven landscape of modern surgical care. Future efforts will assess formal integration of the Device Briefing Tool into institution-wide surgical safety processes.

Frequency of Device-Related Interruptions Using a Scalable Assessment Tool.

BACKGROUND: Surgical devices are implicated in approximately 15% of intraoperative interruptions and 25% of errors. Device-related interruptions (DRIs) are therefore an important target for surgical quality improvement, but scalable measurement methodologies are lacking. The researchers therefore developed, pilot tested, and refined a simple tool for assessing intraoperative DRIs. METHODS: Five DRI categories achieved face validity with frontline providers and surgical safety experts: improper/challenging assembly, device failure, loss of sterility, disconnection, and absent/wrong device. A data collection tool was created based on these categories as well as a free-text section to capture emergent DRI categories. After a brief training session, the tool was pilot tested by observers at a large academic referral center. RESULTS: In a sample of 210 operations, observers noted 66 DRIs across 39 cases. DRIs were most common in colorectal (38.0 per 100 cases), gynecologic (33.3 per 100 cases), and hepatopancreatobiliary surgery (32.1 per 100 cases). Device failure accounted for 30.3% of observed DRIs. Three emergent categories were identified: user unfamiliarity with the device (15.2%), video display malfunction (4.5%), and physical breakage of the device (1.5%). CONCLUSION: Measurement of DRIs by novice observers is a feasible and scalable approach to support quality improvement efforts focusing on surgical devices. This approach could provide actionable insights to improve device safety, such as informing educational and training programs, optimizing surgical tray composition, and improving the physical layout of the operating room.

Disparities in uptake of cholecystectomy for idiopathic pancreatitis: A nationwide retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The majority of cases of idiopathic acute pancreatitis (IAP) are thought to result from occult biliary disease. A growing body of evidence suggests that cholecystectomy for IAP reduces the risk of recurrence by up to two thirds. This study examined nationwide uptake and disparities in adoption of cholecystectomy for IAP. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was queried to identify admissions for IAP between October 2015 and December 2018. Patients who underwent cholecystectomy before discharge and those that did not were compared using Wald χ2 tests for categorical variables and Student's t test for continuous variables. Patient- and hospital-level predictors of cholecystectomy were identified using weighted multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 62,305 estimated admissions for IAP, only 665 (1.1%) underwent cholecystectomy before discharge. Female sex, initiation of total parenteral nutrition (TPN), insurance status, and hospital type were associated with cholecystectomy on univariable analysis. On multivariable analysis, Hispanic patients (odds ration [OR] 1.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-2.56), patients on TPN (OR 2.70, 95% CI 1.17-6.24), and those with private insurance (OR 2.18, 95% CI 1.48-3.21 versus Medicare/Medicaid) were more likely to receive operations. Small hospitals and hospitals in rural areas were least likely to perform empiric cholecystectomies. CONCLUSION: Despite increasing evidence supporting cholecystectomy after IAP, the practice remains rare in the United States. Educational efforts and active implementation efforts are needed to promote adoption. Particular attention should be focused on small, rural centers and those that disproportionately care for uninsured patients and patients with public insurance.

Practice patterns after implementation of a selective spinal immobilization protocol in a regional trauma system.

BACKGROUND: Universal spinal immobilization has been the standard of prehospital trauma care since the 1960s. Selective immobilization has been shown to be safe and effective for emergency medical services use, but it is unclear whether such protocols reduce unnecessary and potentially harmful immobilization practices. This study evaluated the impact of a selective spinal immobilization protocol on practice patterns in a regional trauma system. METHODS: All encounters for traumatic injury in the Tidewater Emergency Medical Services region from 2010 to 2016 were extracted from the Virginia Pre-Hospital Information Bridge. An interrupted time series analysis was used to assess practice change after system-wide protocol implementation in 2013. Intravenous access was used as a nonequivalent outcome measure in the absence of an appropriate control group. RESULTS: A total of 63,981 encounters were analyzed. At baseline, 16.7% of patients underwent full immobilization. The preprotocol slope was slightly positive (0.2% per month; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.2%). Slope and level changes after protocol implementation did not differ from those observed for intravenous access (-0.4% vs. -0.4% per month [ p = 0.4917] and -1.6% vs. -1.1% [ p = 0.1202], respectively). Cervical spinal immobilization became more common over the postimplementation period (0.1% per month; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-0.1%). Rates of immobilization for isolated penetrating trauma remained unchanged. CONCLUSION: Implementation of a selective spinal immobilization protocol did not reduce prehospital immobilization rates in a regional trauma system. Given the entrenched nature of immobilization practices, more intensive education and training strategies are needed. Efforts should prioritize eliminating immobilization for isolated penetrating trauma given its association with increased mortality. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic/Care Management; Level IV.

Point-of-care ultrasound-first for the evaluation of small bowel obstruction: National cost savings, length of stay reduction, and preventable radiation exposure.

OBJECTIVES: Computed tomography (CT) has long been the gold standard in diagnosing patients with suspected small bowel obstruction (SBO). Recently, point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has demonstrated comparable test characteristics to CT imaging for the diagnosis of SBO. Our primary objective was to estimate the annual national cost saving impact of a POCUS-first approach for the evaluation of SBO. Our secondary objectives were to estimate the reduction in radiation exposure and emergency department (ED) length of stay (LOS). METHODS: We created and ran 1000 trials of a Monte Carlo simulation. The study population included all patients presenting to the ED with abdominal pain who were diagnosed with SBO. Using this simulation, we modeled the national annual cost savings in averted advanced imaging from a POCUS-first approach for SBO. The model assumes that all patients who require surgery or have non-diagnostic POCUS exams undergo CT imaging. The model also conservatively assumes that a subset of patients with diagnostic POCUS exams undergo additional confirmatory CT imaging. We used the same Monte Carlo model to estimate the reduction in radiation exposure and total ED bed hours saved. RESULTS: A POCUS-first approach for diagnosing SBO was estimated to save a mean (±SD) of $30.1 million (±8.9 million) by avoiding 143,000 (±31,000) CT scans. This resulted in a national cumulative decrease of 507,000 bed hours (±268,000) in ED LOS. The reduction in radiation exposure to patients could potentially prevent 195 (±56) excess annual cancer cases and 98 (±28) excess annual cancer deaths. CONCLUSIONS: If adopted widely and used consistently, a POCUS-first algorithm for SBO could yield substantial national cost savings by averting advanced imaging, decreasing ED LOS, and reducing unnecessary radiation exposure in patients. Clinical decision tools are needed to better identify which patients would most benefit from CT imaging for SBO in the ED.

Emergency General Surgery Quality Improvement: A Review of Recommended Structure and Key Issues.

Emergency general surgery (EGS) accounts for 11% of hospital admissions, with more than 3 million admissions per year and more than 50% of operative mortality in the US. Recent research into EGS has ignited multiple quality improvement initiatives, and the process of developing national standards and verification in EGS has been initiated. Such programs for quality improvement in EGS include registry formation, protocol and standards creation, evidenced-based protocols, disease-specific protocol implementation, regional collaboratives, targeting of high-risk procedures such as exploratory laparotomy, focus on special populations like geriatrics, and targeting improvements in high opportunity outcomes such as failure to rescue. The authors present a collective narrative review of advances in quality improvement structure in EGS in recent years and summarize plans for a national EGS registry and American College of Surgeons verification for this under-resourced area of surgery.

Non-technical skills in surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Non-technical skills are critical to surgical safety. We examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-technical skills of operating room (OR) teams in Singapore. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observers rated live operations using the Oxford NOTECHS system. Pre- and post-COVID observations were captured from November 2019 to January 2020 and from January 2021 to February 2021, respectively. Scores were compared using Schuirmann's Two One-Sided Test procedure. Multivariable linear regression was used to adjust for case mix. A 10% margin of equivalence was set a priori. RESULTS: Observers rated 159 cases: 75 pre-COVID and 84 post-COVID. There were significant differences between groups in surgical department and surgeon-reported case complexity (both P < 0.001). Total NOTECHS scores increased post-COVID on raw analysis (36.1 vs 38.0, P < 0.001) but remained within the margin of equivalence (90% CI 1.3 to 2.6, P < 0.001). Multivariable analysis demonstrated a similar increase within the margin of equivalence (2.0, 90% CI 1.3 to 2.7). Teamwork and cooperation scores increased by 1.0 post-COVID (90% CI 0.8 to 1.3); all other subcomponent scores were equivalent. CONCLUSION: Non-technical skills before and after the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic were equivalent but not equal. A small but statistically significant improvement post-COVID was driven by an increase in teamwork and cooperation skills. These findings may reflect an improvement in team cohesion, which has been observed in teams under duress in other settings such as the military. Future work should explore the effect of the pandemic on OR culture, team cohesion, and resilience.

Non-technical skill assessments across levels of US surgical training.

BACKGROUND: To ensure safe patient care, regulatory bodies worldwide have incorporated non-technical skills proficiency in core competencies for graduation from surgical residency. We describe normative data on non-technical skill ratings of surgical residents across training levels using the US-adapted Non-Technical Skills for Surgeons (NOTSS-US) assessment tool. METHODS: We undertook an exploratory, prospective cohort study of 32 residents-interns (postgraduate year 1), junior residents (postgraduate years 2-3), and senior residents (postgraduate years 4-5)-across 3 US academic surgery residency programs. Faculty went through online training to rate residents, directly observed residents while operating together, then submitted NOTSS-US ratings on specific resident's intraoperative performance. Mean NOTSS-US ratings (total range 4-20, sum of category scores; situation awareness, decision-making, communication/teamwork, leadership each ranged 1-5, with 1=poor, 3=average, 5=excellent) were stratified by residents' training level and adjusted for resident-, rater-, and case-level variables, using mixed-effects linear regression. RESULTS: For 80 operations, the overall mean total NOTSS-US rating was 12.9 (standard deviation, 3.5). The adjusted mean total NOTSS-US rating was 16.0 for senior residents, 11.6 for junior residents, and 9.5 for interns. Adjusted differences for total NOTSS-US ratings were statistically significant across the following training levels: senior residents to interns (6.5; 95% confidence interval, 4.3-8.7; P < .001), senior to junior residents (4.4; 95% confidence interval, 2.5-6.2; P < .001), and junior residents to interns (2.1; 95% confidence interval, 0.3-3.9; P = .017). Differences in adjusted NOTSS-US ratings across residents' training levels persisted for individual NOTSS-US behavior categories. CONCLUSION: These data and online training materials can support US residency programs in determining competency-based performance milestones to develop surgical trainees' non-technical skills.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Emergency Laparotomy Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations: Part 1-Preoperative: Diagnosis, Rapid Assessment and Optimization.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols reduce length of stay, complications and costs for a large number of elective surgical procedures. A similar, structured approach appears to improve outcomes, including mortality, for patients undergoing high-risk emergency general surgery, and specifically emergency laparotomy. These are the first consensus guidelines for optimal care of these patients using an ERAS approach. METHODS: Experts in aspects of management of the high-risk and emergency general surgical patient were invited to contribute by the International ERAS® Society. Pubmed, Cochrane, Embase, and MEDLINE database searches on English language publications were performed for ERAS elements and relevant specific topics. Studies on each item were selected with particular attention to randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses and large cohort studies, and reviewed and graded using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system. Recommendations were made on the best level of evidence, or extrapolation from studies on non-emergency patients when appropriate. The Delphi method was used to validate final recommendations. The guideline has been divided into two parts: Part 1-Preoperative Care and Part 2-Intraoperative and Postoperative management. This paper provides guidelines for Part 1. RESULTS: Twelve components of preoperative care were considered. Consensus was reached after three rounds. CONCLUSIONS: These guidelines are based on the best available evidence for an ERAS approach to patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. Initial management is particularly important for patients with sepsis and physiological derangement. These guidelines should be used to improve outcomes for these high-risk patients.