Incorporating Well-Being into Mentorship Meetings: A Case Demonstration at Massachusetts General Hospital Department of Surgery a Harvard Medical School Affiliate.

Surgeons have been under great pressure during the COVID pandemic. Their careers are filled with fast paced decisions, life and death situations, and long hours at work. The COVID pandemic created more tasks and even new responsibilities at times, but when the operating rooms were closed down, there was less work. The COVID experience invited the opportunity to rethink mentoring in the surgery department at the Massachusetts General Hospital. The leadership experimented with a new style of mentoring which involved a team approach. In addition, they tried something else that was new: adding a lifestyle medicine expert and wellness coach to the mentoring team. The program was tested on 13 early stage surgeons who found the experience to be beneficial, and they commented that they wished they had it even earlier in their careers. Including a non-surgeon who was a lifestyle medicine physician and wellness coach added an element of whole person health that was acceptable to the surgeons and even embraced as the majority of them elected to follow up with one on one coaching after the mentoring meeting. This team mentoring program with senior surgeons and a lifestyle medicine expert is one that can be explored by other departments and other hospitals given its success at the department of surgery at Massachusetts General Hospital.

Limited disease progression in endocrine surgery patients with treatment delays due to COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic profoundly impacted the delivery of care and timing of elective surgical procedures. Most endocrine-related operations were considered elective and safe to postpone, providing a unique opportunity to assess clinical outcomes under protracted treatment plans. METHODS: American Association of Endocrine Surgeon members were surveyed for participation. A Research Electronic Data Capture survey was developed and distributed to 27 institutions to assess the impact of COVID-19-related delays. The information collected included patient demographics, primary diagnosis, resumption of care, and assessment of disease progression by the surgeon. RESULTS: Twelve out of 27 institutions completed the survey (44.4%). Of 850 patients, 74.8% (636) were female; median age was 56 (interquartile range, 44-66) years. Forty percent (34) of patients had not been seen since their original surgical appointment was delayed; 86.2% (733) of patients had a delay in care with women more likely to have a delay (87.6% vs 82.2% of men, χ2 = 3.84, P = .05). Median duration of delay was 70 (interquartile range, 42-118) days. Among patients with a delay in care, primary disease site included thyroid (54.2%), parathyroid (37.2%), adrenal (6.5%), and pancreatic/gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors (1.3%). In addition, 4.0% (26) of patients experienced disease progression and 4.1% (24) had a change from the initial operative plan. The duration of delay was not associated with disease progression (P = .96) or a change in operative plan (P = .66). CONCLUSION: Although some patients experienced disease progression during COVID-19 delays to endocrine disease-related care, most patients with follow-up did not. Our analysis indicated that temporary delay may be an acceptable course of action in extreme circumstances for most endocrine-related surgical disease.

Assessing Bias and Limitations of Clinical Validation Studies of Molecular Diagnostic Tests for Indeterminate Thyroid Nodules: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background: Molecular tests for thyroid nodules with indeterminate fine needle aspiration results are increasingly used in clinical practice; however, true diagnostic summaries of these tests are unknown. A systematic review and meta-analysis were completed to (1) evaluate the accuracy of commercially available molecular tests for malignancy in indeterminate thyroid nodules and (2) quantify biases and limitations in studies that validate those tests. Summary: PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science were systematically searched through July 2021. English language articles that reported original clinical validation attempts of molecular tests for indeterminate thyroid nodules were included if they reported counts of true-negative, true-positive, false-negative, and false-positive results. We performed screening and full-text review, followed by assessment of eight common biases and limitations, extraction of diagnostic and histopathological information, and meta-analysis of clinical validity using a bivariate linear mixed-effects model. Forty-nine studies were included. Meta-analysis of Afirma Gene expression classifiers (GEC; n = 38 studies) revealed a sensitivity of 0.92 (confidence interval: 0.90-0.94), specificity of 0.26 (0.20-0.32), negative likelihood ratio (LR-) of 0.32 (0.23-0.44), positive LR+ of 1.24 (1.15-1.35), and area under the curve (AUC) of 0.83 (0.74-0.89). Afirma Genomic Sequencing Classifier (GSC; n = 10) had a sensitivity of 0.94 (0.89-0.96), specificity of 0.38 (0.27-0.50), LR- of 0.18 (0.10-0.30), LR+ of 1.52 (1.28-1.87), and AUC of 0.91 (0.62-0.92). ThyroSeq v1 and v2 (n = 10) had a sensitivity of 0.86 (0.82-0.90), specificity of 0.74 (0.59-0.85), LR- of 0.19 (0.13-0.26), LR+ of 3.52 (2.08-5.92), and AUC of 0.86 (0.81-0.90). ThyroSeq v3 (n = 6) had a sensitivity of 0.92 (0.86-0.95), specificity of 0.41 (0.18-0.69), LR- of 0.24 (0.09-0.62), LR+ of 1.67 (1.09-2.98), and AUC of 0.90 (0.63-0.92). Fourteen percent of studies conducted a blinded histopathologic review of excised thyroid nodules, and 8% made the decision to go to surgery blind to molecular test results. Conclusions: Meta-analyses reveal a high diagnostic accuracy of molecular tests for thyroid nodule assessment of malignancy risk; however, these studies are subject to several limitations. Limitations and their potential clinical impacts must be addressed and, when feasible, adjusted for using valid statistical methodologies.