Operating Room Supply Cost and Value of Care after Implementing a Sustainable Quality Intervention.

BACKGROUND: Variability in operating room supply cost is a modifiable cause of suboptimal resource use and low value of care (outcomes vs cost). This study describes implementation of a quality improvement intervention to decrease operating room supply costs. STUDY DESIGN: An automated electronic health record data pipeline harmonized operating room supply cost data with patient and case characteristics and outcomes. For inpatient procedures, predicted mortality and length of stay were used to calculate observed-to-expected ratios and value of care using validated equations. For commonly performed (1 or more per week) procedures, the pipeline generated figures illustrating individual surgeon performance vs peers, costs for each surgeon performing each case type, and control charts identifying out-of-control cases and surgeons with more than 90th percentile costs, which were shared with surgeons and division chiefs alongside guidance for modifying case-specific supply instructions to operating room nurses and technicians. RESULTS: Preintervention control (1,064 cases for 7 months) and postintervention (307 cases for 2 months) cohorts had similar baseline characteristics across all 16 commonly performed procedures. Median costs per case were lower in the intervention cohort ($811 [$525 to $1,367] vs controls: $1,080 [$603 to $1,574], p < 0.001), as was the incidence of out-of-control cases (19 (6.2%) vs 110 (10.3%), p = 0.03). Duration of surgery, length of stay, discharge disposition, and 30-day mortality and readmission rates were similar between cohorts. Value of care was higher in the intervention cohort (1.1 [0.1 to 1.5] vs 1.0 [0.2 to 1.4], p = 0.04). Pipeline runtime was 16:07. CONCLUSIONS: An automated, sustainable quality improvement intervention was associated with decreased operating room supply costs and increased value of care.

Surgical resident experience with common bile duct exploration and assessment of performance and autonomy with formative feedback.

BACKGROUND: Common bile duct exploration (CBDE) is safe and effective for managing choledocholithiasis, but most US general surgeons have limited experience with CBDE and are uncomfortable performing this procedure in practice. Surgical trainee exposure to CBDE is limited, and their learning curve for achieving autonomous, practice-ready performance has not been previously described. This study tests the hypothesis that receipt of one or more prior CBDE operative performance assessments, combined with formative feedback, is associated with greater resident operative performance and autonomy. METHODS: Resident and attending assessments of resident operative performance and autonomy were obtained for 189 laparoscopic or open CBDEs performed at 28 institutions. Performance and autonomy were graded along validated ordinal scales. Cases in which the resident had one or more prior CBDE case evaluations (n = 48) were compared with cases in which the resident had no prior evaluations (n = 141). RESULTS: Compared with cases in which the resident had no prior CBDE case evaluations, cases with a prior evaluation had greater proportions of practice-ready or exceptional performance ratings according to both residents (27% vs. 11%, p = .009) and attendings (58% vs. 19%, p < .001) and had greater proportions of passive help or supervision only autonomy ratings according to both residents (17% vs. 4%, p = .009) and attendings (69% vs. 32%, p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Residents with at least one prior CBDE evaluation and formative feedback demonstrated better operative performance and received greater autonomy than residents without prior evaluations, underscoring the propensity of feedback to help residents achieve autonomous, practice-ready performance for rare operations.

Routine Radiologic Assessment for Anastomotic Leak Is Not Necessary in Asymptomatic Patients After Esophagectomy for Esophageal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leaks (AL) are a major source of post-esophagectomy morbidity and patients are often initially asymptomatic. Debate exists on timing and utility of imaging to detect AL post-esophagectomy. We sought to evaluate the efficacy and timing of radiographic AL evaluation in esophageal cancer patients post-esophagectomy. METHODS: A retrospective database of esophageal cancer patients who underwent esophagectomy at a single institution from 2004 to 2020 was used to determine the utilization, timing, and sensitivity of radiologic testing for AL post-esophagectomy. RESULTS: Seventy-six patients were identified of which 37 (49%) had a cervical anastomosis. Sixty-four (84%) underwent 71 "asymptomatic radiographic leak tests" (ARLT), 7 of which had 2 different tests, including: 41 fluoroscopic esophagrams (58%), 18 CT-esophagrams (25%), and 12 upper GI studies (17%). Seventeen patients (22%) developed clinical signs of AL (hemodynamic instability, leukocytosis) and underwent "symptomatic radiographic leak tests" (SRLT) with fluoroscopic esophagram (n = 9, 12%), CT-esophagram (n = 7, 9%), or upper GI study (n = 1, 1%). ARLT and SRLT were positive in 2/64 (3%) and 17/17 (100%) patients, respectively, for 19 total ALs (25%). Among the 17 SRLT( +) patients, 1 was also ARLT( +), 13 were initially ARLT( -), and 3 were not evaluated by ARLT. The median postoperative day for ARLT and SRLT was 4.0 (IQR 3.0-5.5) and 9.0 days (IQR 6.0-13.0), respectively, with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.005). The sensitivity and specificity of ARLT for detecting AL were 13.3% and 100.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the low ARLT sensitivity, routine use of imaging to detect asymptomatic ALs post-esophagectomy may be limited. Symptomatic ALs were often present in a delayed fashion, even after initial negative imaging.

Prevalence and extent of industry support for program directors of surgical fellowships in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Fellowship program directors have a considerable influence on the future practice patterns of their trainees. Multiple studies have demonstrated that industry can also exert substantial influence on the practice patterns of physicians as a whole. The purpose of this study is to quantify industry support of fellowship program directors across surgical subspecialties and to assess the prevalence of this support within specific subspecialties. METHODS: Fellowship program directors for acute care, breast, burn, cardio-thoracic, critical care, colon and rectal, endocrine, hepato-pancreato-biliary, minimally invasive, plastic, oncologic, pediatric, and vascular surgery for 2017 were identified using a previously described database. The Open Payments Database for 2017 was queried and data regarding general payments, research, associated research payments, and ownership were obtained. The national mean and median payouts to nonfellowship program director surgeons were used to determine subspecialties with substantial industry support. RESULTS: Five hundred and seventy-six fellowship program directors were identified. Of these, 77% of the fellowship program directors had a presence on the Open Payments Database. The subspecialties with the most fellowship program directors receiving any industry payment, regardless of amount, included vascular (93.5%), cardio-thoracic (92.8%), minimally invasive surgery (90.5%), plastics (85.3%), and colon and rectal (81.0%). The subspecialty with the greatest mean payment was minimally invasive surgery (21,175 US dollars); the greatest median payment was vascular (1,871 US dollars). The 3 most common types of payments were for general compensation (31.4%), consulting fees (28.7%), and travel and lodging (14.7%). Vascular surgery had the greatest percentage of fellowship program directors receiving research payments (48%). The greatest amount paid to any individual fellowship program director was 382,368 US dollars. Excluding outliers, fellowship program directors received substantially more payments than those received on average by general surgeons. CONCLUSION: The majority of fellowship program directors receive some industry support. Most payments are for compensation for noncontinuing medical education related services and consulting fees. Certain specialties were more likely to have industry payments than others. Overall, only a minority of fellowship program directors received research support from industry. We advocate for transparent discussions between fellowship program directors and their trainees to help foster healthy academic-industry collaborations.

Gender differences among surgical fellowship program directors.

BACKGROUND: Although women are increasingly represented in American surgery, data regarding sex and academic rank of the leadership of fellowship programs are lacking. METHODS: Demographics and academic ranks for fellowship program directors were analyzed for 811 surgery fellowship programs across 14 specialties. Associations between academic rank and sex were assessed using a χ2 independence test. Correlation between subspecialty compensation and percentage of female fellowship program directors was assessed using Pearson r. RESULTS: Women represented 18% of all fellowship program directors. Eighteen percent of fellowship program directors were assistant professors (25% women vs 17% men, P = .049), 36% were associate professors (39% women vs 35% men, P = .379), and 46% were full professors (36% women vs 48% men, P = .018). The percentage of women program directors was greatest in breast surgery (65%) and least in minimally invasive surgery (6%). There was a negative correlation between subspecialty compensation and percentage of female fellowship program directors (r = -0.62, P = .04). CONCLUSION: Women are underrepresented among surgery fellowship program directors. Female fellowship program directors had lesser academic ranks compared with males. It remains unclear whether women surgeons achieve program director appointments at lesser academic ranks or if promotion among fellowship program directors is influenced by sex.

Postoperative surgical trainee opioid prescribing practices (POST OPP): an institutional study.

BACKGROUND: Increasing mortality from opioid overdoses has prompted increased focus on prescribing practices of physicians. Unfortunately, resident physicians rarely receive formal education in effective opioid prescribing practices or postoperative pain management. Data to inform surgical training programs regarding the utility and feasibility of formal training are lacking. METHODS: Following Institutional Review Board approval, a single institution's resident physicians who had completed at least one surgical rotation were surveyed to assess knowledge of pain management and evaluate opioid prescribing practices. RESULTS: Fifty-three respondents (68% males and 32% females) completed the survey. Most respondents denied receiving formal instruction in opioid pain medication prescribing practices during either medical school (62.3%) or residency (56.6%); however, nearly all respondents stated they were aware of the side effects of opioid pain medications, and a majority felt confident in their knowledge of opioid pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Of the respondents, 47% either "agreed" or "strongly agreed" that they prescribed more opioid medications than necessary to patients being discharged following a surgical procedure. Individual case scenario responses demonstrated variability in the number of morphine milligram equivalents prescribed across scenarios (P < 0.001). Male and nonsurgical specialty respondents reported prescribing significantly fewer overall morphine milligram equivalents in these scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study shows wide variability in opioid prescribing practices and attitudes toward pain management among surgical trainees, illustrating the potential utility of formal education in pain management and effective prescribing of these medications. A broader assessment of surgical trainees' knowledge and perception of opioid prescribing practices is warranted to facilitate the development of such a program.

Percutaneous cholecystostomy: prognostic factors and comparison to cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding long-term outcomes following percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) are limited, and comparisons to cholecystectomy (CCY) are lacking. We hypothesized that chronic disease burden would predict 1-year mortality following PC, and that outcomes following PC and CCY would be similar when controlling for preprocedural risk factors. METHODS: We performed a 10-year retrospective cohort analysis of patients with acute cholecystitis managed by PC (n = 114) or CCY (n = 234). Treatment response was assessed by systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) criteria at PC/CCY and 72 h later. Logistic regression identified predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortality following PC. PC and CCY patients were matched by age, Tokyo Guidelines (TG13) cholecystitis severity grade, and VASQIP calculator predicted mortality (n = 42/group). RESULTS: The presence of SIRS at 72 h following PC was associated with 30-day mortality [OR 8.9 (95% CI 2.6-30)]. SIRS at 72 h was present in and 21.4% of all PC patients, significantly higher than unmatched CCY patients (4.7%, p = 0.048). Independent predictors of 1-year mortality following PC were DNR status [19.7 (2.1-186)], disseminated cancer [7.5 (2.1-26)], and congestive heart failure [3.9 (1.4-11)]. PC patients with none of these risk factors had 17.9% 90-day mortality and no deaths after 90 days; late deaths continued to occur among patients with DNR, CHF, or disseminated cancer. At baseline, PC patients had greater acute and chronic disease burden than CCY patients. After matching, PC and CCY patients had similar age (69 vs. 70 years), TG13 grade (2.4 vs. 2.4), and predicted 30-day mortality (5.5 vs. 6.8%). Matched PC patients had higher 30-day mortality (14.3 vs. 2.4%, p = 0.109) and 180-day mortality (28.6 vs. 7.1%, p = 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment response to PC predicted 30-day mortality; DNR status, and chronic diseases predicted 1-year mortality. Although the matching procedure did not eliminate selection bias, PC was associated with persistent systemic inflammation and higher long-term mortality than CCY.

Disconnect between incidence of nonperforated and perforated appendicitis: implications for pathophysiology and management.

OBJECTIVE: Appendicitis has been declining in frequency for several decades. During the past 10 years, its preoperative diagnosis has been made more reliable by improved computed tomography (CT) imaging. Thresholds for surgical exploration have been lowered by the increased availability of laparoscopic exploration. These innovations should influence the number of appendectomies performed in the United States. We analyzed nationwide hospital discharge data to study the secular trends in appendicitis and appendectomy rates. METHODS: All appendicitis and appendiceal operations reported to the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS) 1970-2004 were classified as perforated, nonperforated, negative, and incidental appendectomies and analyzed over time and by various demographic measures. Secular trends in the population-based incidence rates of nonperforated and perforated appendicitis and negative and incidental appendectomy were examined. RESULTS: Nonperforated appendicitis rates decreased between 1970 and 1995 but increased thereafter. The 25-year decreasing trend was accounted for almost entirely by a decreasing incidence in the 10-19 year age group. The rise after 1995 occurred in all age groups above 5 years and paralleled increasing rates of CT imaging and laparoscopic surgery on the appendix. Since 1995 the negative appendectomy rate has been falling, especially in women, and incidental appendectomies, frequent in prior decades, have been rarely performed. Despite these large changes, the rate of perforated appendicitis has increased steadily over the same period. Although perforated and nonperforated appendicitis rates were correlated in men, they were not significantly correlated in women nor were there significant negative correlations between perforated and negative appendectomy rates. CONCLUSION: The 25-year decline in nonperforated appendicitis and the recent increase in appendectomies coincident with more frequent use of CT imaging and laparoscopic appendectomies did not result in expected decreases in perforation rates. Similarly, time series analysis did not find a significant negative relationship between negative appendectomy and perforation rates. This disconnection of trends suggests that perforated and nonperforated appendicitis may have different pathophysiologies and that nonoperative management with antibiotic therapy may be appropriate for some initially nonperforated cases. Further efforts should be directed at identifying preoperative characteristics associated with nonperforating appendicitis that may eventually allow surgeons to defer operation for those cases of nonperforating appendicitis that have a low perforation risk.