This is Our Lane: A Pilot Study Examining the Surgeon's Role in Social Justice Advocacy.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of social justice advocacy, surgeon attitudes toward individual involvement vary. We hypothesized that the majority of surgeons in this study, regardless of gender or training level, believe that surgeons should be involved in social justice movements. METHODS: A survey was distributed to surgical faculty and trainees at three academic tertiary care centers. Participation was anonymous with 123 respondents. Chi-square and Fisher's exact test were used for analysis with significance accepted when p < 0.05. Thematic analysis was performed on free responses. RESULTS: The response rate was 46%. Compared to men, women were more likely to state that surgeons should be involved (86% vs 64%, p = 0.01) and were personally involved in social justice advocacy (86% vs 51%, p = 0.0002). Social justice issues reported as most important to surgeons differed significantly by gender (p = 0.008). Generated themes for why certain types of advocacy involvement were inappropriate were personal choices, professionalism and relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Social justice advocacy is important to most surgeons in this study, especially women. This emphasizes the need to incorporate advocacy into surgical practice.

Timeliness of pediatric surgical appendicitis care is associated with time of hospital admission.

BACKGROUND: Despite the frequency of acute appendicitis in children, there is no evidence-based consensus surrounding the urgency of the operation if a diagnosis is made after regular business hours. Although a modest delay in time to operation does not increase disease severity, postponing cases to the next calendar day may be associated with higher resource utilization. We aimed to evaluate the trend of delaying appendectomies to the next calendar day and its associated outcomes. METHODS: We queried the Pediatric Health Information System to analyze appendectomy patients younger than 18 y of age from 2010 to 2018. Same-day appendectomy and next-day appendectomy cohorts were created using admission hour and operative day. Healthcare cost, length of stay, surgical complications, and 30-day readmission rates were collected. Bivariate analyses and multivariable regressions were used to evaluate groups stratified by time of presentation. RESULTS: During the study period, 113,662 appendectomies were performed, comprising 88,715 (78.1%) same-day appendectomies and 24,947 (21.9%) next-day appendectomies. A higher proportion of same-day appendectomies (80.5%) were performed during hours 12:00am to 5:00pm and 19.5% were performed during hours 6:00pm to 11:00pm. The trend of next-day appendectomies increased during the study period from 13.9% to 20.2%. This was primarily evident in the 6:00pm to 11:00pm period. The 5:00pm cutoff was most predictive of a next-day appendectomy. Next-day appendectomies had similar rates of surgical complications; however, they were associated with higher costs, longer lengths of stay, and higher readmission rates. CONCLUSION: As the understanding of appendicitis urgency has changed, a more tempered approach of delivering surgical care has trended. Although short delays appear safe, postponement to the next calendar day is associated with higher resource utilization.

Predictors of Utilization and Quality Assessment in Robotic Rectal Cancer Resection: A Review of the National Cancer Database.

Robotic surgery (RS) is a novel treatment for rectal cancer resection (RCR); however, this technology is not widely accessible. The objective of this study is to evaluate the utilization of RS in RCR compared with open and laparoscopic techniques and to assess the quality of resection. RCR from 2010 to 2012 were identified using the National Cancer Database and placed into categories: open, laparoscopic, and robotic. A total of 23,857 patients who received open, laparoscopic, and robotic RCR were included (n = 14,735 (61.8%); 7,185 (30.1%); 1,937 (8.1%), respectively). Patients over 70 had a lower likelihood of robotic RCR. Patients with insurance were 2 times more likely to have robotic RCR. Patients at an academic/research program were more likely to undergo RS compared with a community cancer program (OR 3.6, 95% CI [2.79, 4.78]; P < 0.0001). Length of stay (LOS) was longer in open (7.9 ± 7.1) versus laparoscopic (6.6 ± 6.3) or robotic (6.8 ± 6.4) RCR (P < 0.0001). Although there was an increased likelihood of positive surgical margins with open RCR (OR 1.3, 95% CI [1.09, 1.66]; P < 0.0001), there was no difference in robotic and laparoscopic techniques. Younger insured patients at academic/research affiliated hospitals have a higher likelihood of receiving robotic RCR. Compared with open RCR, robotic RCR have a lower likelihood of positive surgical margins and shorter LOS.