"It's Incapacitated Me in so Many Ways": Older Adults' Lived Experience With Postoperative Symptoms at Home After Major Elective Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: This qualitative study aimed to explore the challenges faced by older adults regarding the postoperative symptom experience after major elective surgery. BACKGROUND: Although extensively studied in oncology settings, the impact of postoperative symptom burden remains largely underexplored in elective major surgery among older adults. METHODS: We employed convenience sampling to recruit adults aged 65 years or above undergoing major elective surgery at the University of California, San Francisco. Semistructured interviews regarding the surgical experience were conducted at 1 and 3 months postoperatively. An inductive qualitative approach was used to identify emerging themes. Symptoms revealed by participants during interviews were also captured. RESULTS: Nineteen participants completed a 1-month postoperative interview, and 17 additionally completed a 3-month interview. Three themes emerged: (1) postoperative symptoms significantly impacted valued life activities and psychosocial well-being, (2) participants felt "caught off guard" by the intensity and duration of postoperative symptoms, and (3) participants expressed the need for additional support, resources, and education on symptom management. The most frequently mentioned symptoms were postoperative pain (n=12, 63.1%), gastrointestinal discomfort (n=8, 42.1%), and anxiety/stress (n=8, 42.1%) at 1-month postsurgery compared with pain and depression (both n=6, 35.3%) at 3 months. CONCLUSIONS: Study participants were surprised by the negative impact of postoperative symptoms on their psychosocial well-being and ability to engage in valued life activities. Symptom burden is an important patient-reported outcome that should be assessed postoperatively. Interventions to minimize postoperative symptom burden in older adults could optimize quality of life and participation in meaningful activities during surgical recovery.

Public Opinions About Surgery in Older Adults: A Thematic Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine public opinions of surgery in older adults. BACKGROUND: Increasing numbers of older adults are undergoing surgery. National healthcare organizations recognize the increased risks of postoperative complications and mortality in the older surgical population and have made efforts to improve the care of older adults undergoing surgery through hospital-level programs. However, limited research has explored the opinions and responses of the wider U.S. public regarding surgery in older adults. METHODS: We performed a qualitative, thematic analysis of reader comments posted in response to online newspaper articles relating to surgery in older adults. Articles were published in 2019-2020 and targeted for a popular press audience. RESULTS: Nine hundred eight reader comments posted in response to 6 articles relating to surgery in older adults were identified. Articles were published in online editions of print newspapers with a digital circulation between 1.3 and 5.7 million subscribers. Three themes were identified: (1) wariness/distrust towards healthcare: including general distrust of medicine and distrust of surgery, (2) problems experienced: ineffective communication and unrealistic expectations, and (3) recommended solutions: the need for multidisciplinary teams and patient-centered communication. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the public viewed surgery in older adults with wariness/distrust due to ineffective communication and unrealistic expectations. Specialized surgical care tailored to the unique needs of older adults is needed. The public perspective suggests that U.S. health systems should strongly consider adopting programs that provide care to meet the unique needs of older adults undergoing surgery and ultimately improve both patient outcomes and their surgical experience.

Relationship between pelvic sensations and lifetime exposure to receptive anal intercourse among people with prostates.

BACKGROUND: Despite the negative stigma on receptive anal intercourse (RAI), this behavior has a positive influence on individuals' sexual and relationship health. No large studies have previously looked at specific sensations experienced during RAI and how these sensations may change with experience. AIM: In this study we aimed to quantify commonly reported pelvic sensations during RAI and determine whether their presentation changes with increasing experience of RAI. METHODS: An internet survey was conducted on sensations felt during RAI among people with prostates from July 2022-January 2023. The survey content was developed based on a mixed-methods qualitative study and inquired about demographic and sexual histories as well as sensations (pleasure, pain, urinary, and bowel) experienced during RAI. We used descriptive statistics to describe demographic and sexual histories. All data were stratified by lifetime exposure to RAI. OUTCOMES: The primary outcomes assessed included the quantification of both the primary sensations experienced during RAI and the associated bother. RESULTS: In total, 975 participants completed the survey. The median age was 32 (range 18-78) years. The average age of first participation in RAI was 21 ± 6.6 years. Most respondents were having sex at least once a week (65%). Nine percent of respondents reported fewer than 10 experiences with RAI, 26% reported 11-50 RAI experiences, 32% reported 51-200 experiences, 16% reported 201-500 experiences, and 18% reported >500 experiences. As the number of experiences with RAI increased (from <10 to >500 exposures), the reported frequency of pleasurable sensation increased from 41% to 92% (P < .0001), whereas severe insertional pain and symptoms of bowel urgency decreased from 39% to 13% and from 21% to 6%, respectively (P < .0001). Urinary urgency sensation did not differ by lifetime RAI experience. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Lifetime RAI exposure can be readily assessed and correlates not only with pelvic sensation but also many other aspects of sexual health. These results imply that the etiology of dissatisfaction with pleasure or anodyspareunia during RAI may differ by lifetime RAI exposure. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This is the first study to our knowledge to assess pelvic sensations experienced during RAI among a large sample of individuals. This is a cross-sectional study, and we cannot conclude how pelvic sensations change over time among individuals. Internet-based participants may not be representative of clinical populations. CONCLUSION: Lifetime exposure to RAI is positively associated with pleasure and is negatively associated with pain and bowel urgency. Pelvic sensations experienced during RAI appear to be dependent on lifetime RAI exposure history regardless of age.

Venous thromboembolism prophylaxis following colorectal surgery: a survey of American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgery (ASCRS) member surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) is associated with significant morbidity. Evidence from other surgical specialties demonstrate inadequate use of extended VTE prophylaxis following cancer surgery. While guidelines recommend extended VTE prophylaxis for patients undergoing surgery for colorectal cancer (CRC), it is unknown to what extent colon and rectal surgeons adhere to these recommendations. METHODS: An 18-question online survey was distributed to all surgeon members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS). The survey was designed to capture knowledge, attitudes, and practices regarding ASCRS VTE prevention guidelines. Questions were also designed to elucidate barriers to adopting these guidelines. RESULTS: The survey was distributed to 2,316 ASCRS-member surgeons and there were 201 complete responses (8.7% response rate). Most respondents (136/201, 68%) reported that they were familiar with ASCRS VTE prevention guidelines and used them to guide their practice. Extended VTE prophylaxis was reported to be routinely prescribed by the majority of surgeons following CRC resection (109/201, 54%), with an additional 27% reporting selective prescribing (55/201). The most frequently reported reasons for not prescribing extended VTE chemoprophylaxis following CRC resection included patient compliance and insurance/copay issues. CONCLUSION: Most ASCRS-member surgeon respondents reported that they are familiar with ASCRS VTE prevention guidelines, though only 54% surgeons reported routinely prescribing extended VTE prophylaxis following CRC surgery. Patient compliance and insurance issues were identified as the most common barriers. Targeted interventions at the surgeon, patient, and payer level are required to increase the use of extended VTE prophylaxis following CRC resection.

Improving Serious Illness Care for Surgical Patients: Quality Indicators for Surgical Palliative Care.

OBJECTIVE: Develop quality indicators that measure access to and the quality of primary PC delivered to seriously ill surgical patients. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: PC for seriously ill surgical patients, including aligning treatments with patients' goals and managing symptoms, is associated with improved patient-oriented outcomes and decreased healthcare utilization. However, efforts to integrate PC alongside restorative surgical care are limited by a lack of surgical quality indicators to evaluate primary PC delivery. METHODS: We developed a set of 27 preliminary indicators that measured palliative processes of care across the surgical episode, including goals of care, decision-making, symptom assessment, and issues related to palliative surgery. Then using the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness method, a 12-member expert advisory panel rated the validity (primary outcome) and feasibility of each indicator twice: (1) remotely and (2) after an in-person moderated discussion. RESULTS: After 2 rounds of rating, 24 indicators were rated as valid, covering the preoperative evaluation (9 indicators), immediate preoperative readiness (2 indicators), intraoperative (1 indicator), postoperative (8 indicators), and end of life (4 indicators) phases of surgical care. CONCLUSIONS: This set of quality indicators provides a comprehensive set of process measures that possess the potential to measure high quality PC for seriously ill surgical patients throughout the surgical episode.

Symptomatic Cholelithiasis: Do Minority Patients Experience Delays to Surgery?

BACKGROUND: Cholecystectomy is one of the most common surgeries and the majority are performed to treat symptomatic cholelithiasis (SC). While surgery is often elective, poor access or delays in care may lead to urgent cases, which are potentially associated with higher complication rates. This study aims to determine if minority patients with SC have higher rates of urgent cholecystectomy and postoperative complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Analysis of patients undergoing cholecystectomy for SC utilizing American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) from 2017 to 2019. Primary outcome was acuity of cholecystectomy (i.e., urgent versus elective). Secondary outcomes were any post-operative complication and length of stay. RESULTS: Patients who underwent cholecystectomy for SC between 2017 to 2019 (N: 13,390) were analyzed. Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds of undergoing urgent surgery as compared to non-Hispanic White patients, and Hispanics had over twice the odds (adjusted odds ratio (aOR), 2.16; 95% CI 1.93-2.43), adjusting for age, sex, and comorbidities. Having urgent surgery was associated with higher odds for developing any postoperative complication and experiencing longer length of stay. After adjusting for urgency of surgery, Non-Hispanic Black and Asian patients were at risk for higher postoperative length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black patients were more likely to undergo urgent cholecystectomy as compared to non-Hispanic White patients for SC. Urgent surgery was independently associated with a higher complication rate and longer length of stay. Further characterization of the delays to surgery that lead to these differences are critical to prevent further treatment disparities.

The Association Between Risk Aversion of Surgeons and Their Clinical Decision-Making.

BACKGROUND: The extent to which a surgeon's risk aversion influences their clinical decisions remains unknown. We assessed whether a surgeon's attitude toward risk ("risk aversion") influences their surgical decisions and whether the relationship can be explained by differences in surgeons' perception of treatment risks and benefits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We presented a series of detailed clinical vignettes to a national sample of surgeons (n = 1,769; 13.4% adjusted response rate) and asked them to complete an instrument that measured how risk averse they are within their clinical practice (scale 6-36; higher number indicates greater risk aversion). For each vignette, participants rated their likelihood of recommending an operation and judged the likelihood of complications or full recovery. We examined whether differences in perceived likelihood of complications versus recovery could explain why risk-averse surgeons may be less likely to recommend an operation. RESULTS: Surgeons varied in their self-reported risk aversion score (median = 25, interquartile range[22,28]). Scores did not differ by level of surgeon experience or gender. Risk-averse surgeons were significantly less likely to recommend an operation for patients with exactly the same condition (65.5% for surgeons in highest quartile of risk aversion versus 62.3% for lowest quartile; P = 0.02). However, after controlling for surgeons' perception of the likelihood of complications versus recovery, there was no longer a significant association between surgeons' risk aversion and the decision to recommend an operation (64.7% versus 64.8%; P = 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons vary widely in their self-reported risk aversion. Risk-averse surgeons were significantly less likely to recommend an operation, a finding that was explained by a higher perceived probability of post-operative complications than their colleagues.

Association of Geriatric Events With Perioperative Outcomes After Elective Inpatient Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Older adults undergoing surgery are at risk for geriatric events (GEs: delirium, dehydration, falls or fractures, failure to thrive, and pressure ulcers). The prevalence and association of GEs with clinical outcomes after elective surgery is unclear. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the 2013-2014 National Inpatient Sample, we analyzed hospital admissions for the five most common elective procedures (total knee arthroplasty, right hemicolectomy, carotid endarterectomy, aortic valve replacement, and radical prostatectomy) in older adults (age ≥ 65). Our primary variable of interest was presence of any GE. Logistic regression estimated the association of GEs with (1) age group and (2) perioperative outcomes (mortality, postoperative complications, prolonged length of stay, and discharge to skilled nursing facility). RESULTS: Of 1,255,120 admissions, 66.5% were aged ≥65. The overall rate of any GE was 2.4% and increased with age (55-64 y: 1.5%; 65-74: 2.2%; ≥75: 4.1%; P < 0.001). After adjustment, the probability of any GE increased with age (P < 0.001). Rates of GEs varied by procedure (P < 0.001). In comparison with admissions with no GEs, one or more GE was associated with higher probability of worse outcomes including mortality, postoperative complications, prolonged length of stay, and discharge to skilled nursing facility (all P < 0.001). In addition, there was a dose-dependent relationship between GEs and these poor perioperative outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: GEs are strongly associated with poor perioperative outcomes. Efforts should focus on mutable factors responsible for GEs to optimize surgical care for older adults.

Operative Incision and Drainage for Perirectal Abscesses: What Are Risk Factors for Prolonged Length of Stay, Reoperation, and Readmission?

BACKGROUND: Perirectal abscess is a common problem. Despite a seemingly simple disease to manage, clinical outcomes of perirectal abscesses can vary significantly given the wide array of patients who are susceptible to this disease. OBJECTIVE: Our aims were to evaluate the outcomes after operative incision and drainage for perirectal abscess and to examine factors associated with length of stay, reoperations, and readmissions. DESIGN: This was a retrospective analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. SETTINGS: The study was conducted with hospitals participating in the surgical database. PATIENTS: Adult patients undergoing outpatient perirectal abscess procedures from 2011 through 2016 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Study outcomes were length of stay, reoperation, and readmission. RESULTS: We identified 2358 patients undergoing incision and drainage for perirectal abscesses. Approximately 35% of patients required hospital stay. Reoperations occurred in 3.4%, with median time to reoperation of 15.5 days. The majority of reoperations (79.7%) were performed for additional incision and drainage. Readmissions rate was 3.0%, with median time to readmission of 10.5 days. Common indications for readmissions included recurrent/persistent abscess (41.4%) and fever/sepsis (8.6%). Risk factors for hospitalization in multivariable analysis were preoperative sepsis, bleeding disorder, and non-Hispanic black and Hispanic races. For reoperations, risk factors included morbid obesity, preoperative sepsis, and dependent functional status. Lastly, for readmissions, female sex, steroid/immunosuppression, and dependent functional status were significant risk factors. LIMITATIONS: The study was limited by its retrospective analysis and potential selection bias in decisions on hospital stay, reoperation, and readmission. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal outcomes after outpatient operative incision and drainage for perirectal abscesses are not uncommon in the United States. In the era of value-based care, additional work is needed to optimize use outcomes for high-risk patients undergoing perirectal incision and drainage. Strategies to prevent inadequate drainage at the time of the initial operative incision and drainage (ie, use of imaging modalities and thorough examination under anesthesia) are warranted to improve patient outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B229. INCISIÓN Y DRENAJE QUIRÚRGICOS DE ABSCESOS PERIRRECTALES: CUALES SON LOS FACTORES DE RIESGO PARA UNA ESTADÍA PROLONGADA, REINTERVENCIÓN Y READMISION?: Los abscesos perirrectales son un problema frecuente. A pesar que parecen ser una afección aparentemente simple de manejar, los resultados clínicos de la incisión y drenaje quirúrgicos pueden variar significativamente dada la amplia variedad de pacientes susceptibles de sufrir esta afección.Evaluar los resultados después de la incisión y el drenaje quirúrgicos de un absceso perirrectal y analizar los factores asociados con la duración de la hospitalización, la reoperación y la readmisión.Análisis retrospectivo de la base de datos del Programa Americano de Mejora de la Calidad Quirúrgica.Hospitales que participan en la base de datos quirúrgica.Pacientes adultos sometidos a incisión y drenaje quirúrgico ambulatorio de un absceso perirrectal desde 2011 hasta 2016.Los resultados del estudio fueron la duración de la hospitalización, la reoperación y el reingreso.Fueron estudiados 2,358 pacientes sometidos a incisión y drenaje por abscesos perirrectales. Aproximadamente el 35% de los pacientes requirieron hospitalización. Las reoperaciones ocurrieron en 3.4% con una mediana de tiempo de reoperación de 15.5 días. La mayoría de las reoperaciones (79.7%) se realizaron para una incisión y drenaje adicionales. La tasa de reingreso fue del 3.0% con una mediana de tiempo de reingreso de 10.5 días. Las indicaciones comunes para los reingresos incluyeron abscesos recurrentes / persistentes (41.4%) y fiebre / sepsis (8.6%). Los factores de riesgo para la hospitalización en el análisis multivariable fueron sepsis preoperatoria, trastorno hemorrágico, raza negra no hispánica y raza hispana. Para las reoperaciones, los factores de riesgo incluyeron obesidad mórbida, sepsis preoperatoria y estado funcional dependiente. Por último, para los reingresos, el sexo femenino, uso de corticoides / inmunosupresores y un estadío funcional dependiente fueron factores de riesgo significativos.Análisis retrospectivo y posible sesgo de selección en las decisiones sobre hospitalización, reoperación y reingreso.Un resultado poco satisfactorio después de la incisión quirúrgica el drenaje de abscesos perirrectales ambulatoriamente no son infrecuentes en los Estados Unidos. En la era de la atención basada en los resultados, se necesita mucho más trabajo para optimizar los mismos en pacientes de alto riesgo sometidos a incisión y drenaje perirrectales. Las estrategias para prevenir el drenaje inadecuado en el momento de la incisión quirúrgica inicial y el drenaje (es decir, el uso de modalidades de imágenes, un examen completo bajo anestesia) son una garantía para mejorar los resultados en estos pacientes. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B229.

Assessing the Quality of Rectal Cancer Pathology Reports in National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol R-04/NRG Oncology.

BACKGROUND: Accurate and comprehensive surgical pathology reports are integral to the quality of cancer care. Despite guidelines from the College of American Pathologists, variations in reporting quality continue to exist. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the quality of rectal cancer pathology reports and to identify areas of deficiency and potential sources of reporting variations. DESIGN: This is a retrospective analysis of prospectively obtained pathology reports. SETTING: This study is based at the hospitals participating in the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol R-04 study. PATIENTS: Patients with rectal cancer undergoing surgical resection between July 2004 and August 2010 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the adherence to the College of American Pathologists guidelines and the impact of synoptic reporting, academic status, rural/urban setting, and hospital bed size on reporting quality. RESULTS: We identified 1004 surgical pathology reports for rectal cancer surgery from 383 hospitals and 755 pathologists. The overall adherence rate to the College of American Pathologists guidelines was 73.3%. Notable reporting deficiencies were found in several key pathology characteristics, including tumor histologic grade (reporting rate 77.8%), radial margin (84.6%), distance from the closest margin (47.9%), treatment effect (47.1%), and lymphovascular (73.1%)/perineural invasions (35.4%). Synoptic reporting use and urban hospital settings were associated with better adherence rates, whereas academic status and hospital bed size had no impact. Reporting variations existed not only between institutions, but also within individual hospitals and pathologists. There was a trend for improved adherence over time (2005 = 65.7% vs 2010 = 82.3%, p < 0.001), which coincided with the increased adoption of synoptic reporting by pathologists (2005 vs 2010, 9.4% vs 25.3%, p < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: Data were obtained from a restricted setting (ie, hospitals participating in a randomized clinical trial). CONCLUSIONS: Wide variations in the quality of pathology reporting are observed for rectal cancer. The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer mandates that programs meet strict quality standards for surgical pathology reporting. Further improvement is needed in this key aspect of oncology care for patients with rectal cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B238.ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT00058 EVALUACIÓN DE LA CALIDAD DE LOS INFORMES DE PATOLOGÍA QUIRÚRGICA EN CASOS DE CÁNCER DE RECTO DEL NSABP R-04/ ONCOLOGÍA DEL NRG: Un informe de patología quirúrgica preciso y completo es fundamental en la calidad de atención de pacientes con cáncer. A pesar de las normas establecidas por el Colegio Americano de Patología, la variabilidad en la calidad de los informes es evidente.Evaluar la calidad de los informes de patología en casos de cáncer de recto para así identificar las áreas con deficiencias y las posibles fuentes variables en los mencionados informes.Análisis retrospectivo de informes de patología quirúrgica obtenidos prospectivamente.Hospitales que participan del Protocolo del Estudio Nacional R-04 como Adyuvantes Quirúrgicos de Mama e Intestino.Todos aquellos pacientes con cáncer de recto sometidos a resección quirúrgica entre Julio 2004 y Agosto 2010.Cumplimiento de las normas del Colegio Americano de Patología, del impacto de los informes sinópticos, del estado académico, del entorno rural / urbano y el número de camas hospitalarias en en la calidad de los informes.Identificamos 1,004 informes de patología quirúrgica en casos de cirugía en cáncer de recto en 383 hospitales y 755 patólogos. La tasa general de adherencia a las directivas del Colegio Americano de Patología fue del 73.3%. Se encontraron deficiencias notables en los informes en varias características patológicas clave incluidos, el grado histológico del tumor (tasa de informe 77.8%), margenes radiales (84.6%), distancia del margen más cercano (47.9%), efecto del tratamiento (47.1%) invasión linfovascular (73.1 %) / invasion perineural (35.4%). El uso de informes sinópticos y los entornos hospitalarios urbanos se asociaron con mejores tasas de adherencia, mientras que el estado académico y el número de camas hospitalarias no tuvieron ningún impacto. Hubo variaciones en los informes no solo entre instituciones, sino también dentro de hospitales y patólogos individuales. Hubo una tendencia a una mejor adherencia a lo largo del tiempo (2005 = 65.7% v 2010 = 82.3%, p < 0.001), que coincidió con la mayor adopción de informes sinópticos por parte de los patólogos (2005 v 2010, 9.4% v 25.3%, p < 0.001)Datos obtenidos de un entorno restringido (es decir, hospitales que participan en un ensayo clínico aleatorizado).Se observaron grandes variaciones en la calidad de los informes de patología quirúrgica en casos de cáncer de recto. El Programa Nacional de Acreditación para Cáncer de Recto exige que los programas cumplan con estrictos estándares de calidad para los informes de patología quirúrgica. Se necesita una mejoría adicional en este aspecto clave de la atención oncológica para pacientes con cáncer de recto. Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B238.Registro de Clinical Trials.gov: NCT00058.

The American College of Surgeons Geriatric Surgery Verification Program and the Practicing Colorectal Surgeon.

The population is aging and older adults are increasingly undergoing surgery. Colorectal surgeons need to understand the risks inherent in the care of older adults and identify concrete ways to improve the quality of care for this vulnerable population. Goals for the practicing colorectal surgeon include: 1) introduce the American College of Surgeons' (ACS) Geriatric Surgery Verification (GSV) Program and understand the intersection with colorectal surgery, 2) examine the 30 evidence-based GSV standards and how they can achieve better outcomes after colorectal surgery, and 3) outline the value and benefits for colorectal surgeons of implementing such a program.

A logic model for precision medicine implementation informed by stakeholder views and implementation science.

PURPOSE: Precision medicine promises to improve patient outcomes, but much is unknown about its adoption within health-care systems. A comprehensive implementation plan is needed to realize its benefits. METHODS: We convened 80 stakeholders for agenda setting to inform precision medicine policy, delivery, and research. Conference proceedings were audio-recorded, transcribed, and thematically analyzed. We mapped themes representing opportunities, challenges, and implementation strategies to a logic model, and two implementation science frameworks provided context. RESULTS: The logic model components included inputs: precision medicine infrastructure (clinical, research, and information technology), big data (from data sources to analytics), and resources (e.g., workforce and funding); activities: precision medicine research, practice, and education; outputs: precision medicine diagnosis; outcomes: personal utility, clinical utility, and health-care utilization; and impacts: precision medicine value, equity and access, and economic indicators. Precision medicine implementation challenges include evidence gaps demonstrating precision medicine utility, an unprepared workforce, the need to improve precision medicine access and reduce variation, and uncertain impacts on health-care utilization. Opportunities include integrated health-care systems, partnerships, and data analytics to support clinical decisions. Examples of implementation strategies to promote precision medicine are: changing record systems, data warehousing techniques, centralized technical assistance, and engaging consumers. CONCLUSION: We developed a theory-based, context-specific logic model that can be used by health-care organizations to facilitate precision medicine implementation.

Stakeholders' views on the value of outcomes from clinical genetic and genomic interventions.

PURPOSE: Robust evidence about the value of clinical genomic interventions (CGIs), such as genetic/genomic testing or clinical genetic evaluation, is limited. We obtained stakeholders' perspectives on outcomes from CGIs to help inform their value. METHODS: We used an adapted Delphi expert panel process. Two anonymous survey rounds assessed the value of 44 CGI outcomes and whether a third party should pay for them, with discussion in between rounds. RESULTS: Sixty-six panelists responded to the first-round survey and 60 to the second. Policy-makers/payers gave the lowest ratings for value and researchers gave the highest. Patients/consumers had the most uncertainty about value and payment by a third party. Uncertainty about value was observed when evidence of proven health benefit was lacking, potential harms outweighed benefits for reproductive outcomes, and outcomes had only personal utility for individuals or family members. Agreement about outcomes for which a third party should not pay included prevention through surgery with unproven health benefits, establishing ancestry, parental consanguinity, and paternity. CONCLUSION: Research is needed to understand factors contributing to uncertainty and stakeholder differences about the value of CGI outcomes. Reaching consensus will accelerate the creation of metrics to generate the evidence needed to inform value and guide policies that promote availability, uptake, and coverage of CGIs.

Postoperative Delirium as a Target for Surgical Quality Improvement.

OBJECTIVE: To explore hospital-level variation in postoperative delirium using a multi-institutional data source. BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium is closely related to serious morbidity, disability, and death in older adults. Yet, surgeons and hospitals rarely measure delirium rates, which limits quality improvement efforts. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Geriatric Surgery Pilot (2014 to 2015) collects geriatric-specific variables, including postoperative delirium using a standardized definition. Hierarchical logistic regression models, adjusted for case mix [Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code] and patient risk factors, yielded risk-adjusted and smoothed odds ratios (ORs) for hospital performance. Model performance was assessed with Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) statistic and c-statistics, and compared across surgical specialties. RESULTS: Twenty thousand two hundred twelve older adults (≥65 years) underwent inpatient operations at 30 hospitals. Postoperative delirium occurred in 2427 patients (12.0%) with variation across specialties, from 4.7% in gynecology to 13.7% in cardiothoracic surgery. Hierarchical modeling with 20 risk factors (HL = 9.423, P = 0.31; c-statistic 0.86) identified 13 hospitals as statistical outliers (5 good, 8 poor performers). Per hospital, the median risk-adjusted delirium rate was 10.4% (range 3.2% to 27.5%). Operation-specific risk and preoperative cognitive impairment (OR 2.9, 95% confidence interval 2.5-3.5) were the strongest predictors. The model performed well across surgical specialties (orthopedic, general surgery, and vascular surgery). CONCLUSION: Rates of postoperative delirium varied 8.5-fold across hospitals, and can feasibly be measured in surgical quality datasets. The model performed well with 10 to 12 variables and demonstrated applicability across surgical specialties. Such efforts are critical to better tailor quality improvement to older surgical patients.

Hospital Standards to Promote Optimal Surgical Care of the Older Adult: A Report From the Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish high-quality, valid standards to improve surgical care of the older adult. BACKGROUND: The aging population increases demand for high-quality surgical care. Building upon prior guidelines, quality indicators, and pilot projects, the Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery (CQGS) includes 58 diverse stakeholder organizations committed to improving geriatric surgery. METHODS: Using a modified RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Methodology, 44 of 58 CQGS Stakeholders twice rated validity (primary outcome) and feasibility for 308 standards, ranging from goals and decision-making, pre-operative assessment and optimization, perioperative and postoperative care, to transitions of care beyond the acute care hospital. RESULTS: Three hundred six of 308 (99%) standards were rated as valid to improve quality of geriatric surgery. There were 4 sections. Section 1 included 157 (57%) standards and focused on goals and decision-making, preoperative optimization, and transitions into and out of the hospital. Section 2 included 84 (27.3%) standards focused on in-hospital care, across the immediate preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. Section 3 included 59 (19.1%) standards about program management, including personnel and committee structure, credentialing, and education. Section 4 included 8 (2.6%) standards establishing overarching concepts for data collection and patient follow-up. Two hundred ninety of 308 standards (94.2%) were rated as feasible; 18 (5.8%) were rated as uncertain in feasibility. CONCLUSIONS: CQGS Stakeholders rated the vast majority of standards of care as highly valid (99%) and feasible (94%) for improving the quality of surgical care provided to older adults. Future work will focus on a pilot phase to better understand and address challenges to implementation of the standards.

A prognostic mutation panel for predicting cancer recurrence in stages II and III colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Approximately 20-40% of stage II/III colorectal cancer (CRC) patients develop relapse. Clinicopathological factors alone are limited in detecting these patients, resulting in potential under/over-treatment. We sought to identify a prognostic tumor mutational profile that could predict CRC recurrence. METHODS: Whole-exome sequencing data were obtained for 207 patients with stage II/III CRC from The Cancer Genome Atlas. Mutational landscape in relapse-free versus relapsed cohort was compared using Fisher's exact test, followed by multivariate Cox regression to identify genes associated with cancer recurrence. Bootstrap-validation was used to examine internal/external validity. RESULTS: We identified five prognostic genes (APAF1, DIAPH2, NTNG1, USP7, and VAV2), which were combined to form a prognostic mutation panel. Patients with ≥1 mutation(s) within this five-gene panel had worse prognosis (3-yr relapse-free survival [RFS]: 53.0%), compared to patients with no mutation (3-yr RFS: 84.3%). In multivariate analysis, the five-gene panel remained prognostic for cancer recurrence independent of stage and high-risk features (hazard ratio 3.63, 95%CI [1.93-6.83], P < 0.0001). Furthermore, its prognostic accuracy was superior to the American Joint Commission on Cancer classification (concordance-index: 0.70 vs 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Our proposed mutation panel identifies CRC patients at high-risk for recurrence, which may help guide adjuvant therapy and post-operative surveillance protocols.

Impact of a Risk Calculator on Risk Perception and Surgical Decision Making: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether exposure to data from a risk calculator influences surgeons' assessments of risk and in turn, their decisions to operate. BACKGROUND: Little is known about how risk calculators inform clinical judgment and decision-making. METHODS: We asked a national sample of surgeons to assess the risks (probability of serious complications or death) and benefits (recovery) of operative and nonoperative management and to rate their likelihood of recommending an operation (5-point scale) for 4 detailed clinical vignettes wherein the best treatment strategy was uncertain. Surgeons were randomized to the clinical vignettes alone (control group; n = 384) or supplemented by data from a risk calculator (risk calculator group; n = 395). We compared surgeons' judgments and decisions between the groups. RESULTS: Surgeons exposed to the risk calculator judged levels of operative risk that more closely approximated the risk calculator value (RCV) compared with surgeons in the control group [mesenteric ischemia: 43.7% vs 64.6%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 25%); gastrointestinal bleed: 47.7% vs 53.4%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 38%); small bowel obstruction: 13.6% vs 17.5%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 14%); appendicitis: 13.4% vs 24.4%, P < 0.001 (RCV = 5%)]. Surgeons exposed to the risk calculator also varied less in their assessment of operative risk (standard deviations: mesenteric ischemia 20.2% vs 23.2%, P = 0.01; gastrointestinal bleed 17.4% vs 24.1%, P < 0.001; small bowel obstruction 10.6% vs 14.9%, P < 0.001; appendicitis 15.2% vs 21.8%, P < 0.001). However, averaged across the 4 vignettes, the 2 groups did not differ in their reported likelihood of recommending an operation (mean 3.7 vs 3.7, P = 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to risk calculator data leads to less varied and more accurate judgments of operative risk among surgeons, and thus may help inform discussions of treatment options between surgeons and patients. Interestingly, it did not alter their reported likelihood of recommending an operation.

Surgeon Perception of Risk and Benefit in the Decision to Operate.

OBJECTIVE: To determine how surgeons' perceptions of treatment risks and benefits influence their decisions to operate. BACKGROUND: Little is known about what makes one surgeon choose to operate on a patient and another chooses not to operate. METHODS: Using an online study, we presented a national sample of surgeons (N = 767) with four detailed clinical vignettes (mesenteric ischemia, gastrointestinal bleed, bowel obstruction, appendicitis) where the best treatment option was uncertain and asked them to: (1) judge the risks (probability of serious complications) and benefits (probability of recovery) for operative and nonoperative management and (2) decide whether or not they would recommend an operation. RESULTS: Across all clinical vignettes, surgeons varied markedly in both their assessments of the risks and benefits of operative and nonoperative management (narrowest range 4%-100% for all four predictions across vignettes) and in their decisions to operate (49%-85%). Surgeons were less likely to operate as their perceptions of operative risk increased [absolute difference (AD) = -29.6% from 1.0 standard deviation below to 1.0 standard deviation above mean (95% confidence interval, CI: -31.6, -23.8)] and their perceptions of nonoperative benefit increased [AD = -32.6% (95% CI: -32.8,--28.9)]. Surgeons were more likely to operate as their perceptions of operative benefit increased [AD = 18.7% (95% CI: 12.6, 21.5)] and their perceptions of nonoperative risk increased [AD = 32.7% (95% CI: 28.7, 34.0)]. Differences in risk/benefit perceptions explained 39% of the observed variation in decisions to operate across the four vignettes. CONCLUSIONS: Given the same clinical scenarios, surgeons' perceptions of treatment risks and benefits vary and are highly predictive of their decisions to operate.

Variation in Hospital Use of Postacute Care After Surgery and the Association With Care Quality.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about hospital use of postacute care after surgery and whether it is related to measures of surgical quality. RESEARCH DESIGN: We used data merged between a national surgery registry, Medicare inpatient claims, the Area Resource File, and the American Hospital Association Annual Survey (2005-2008). Using bivariate and multivariate analyses, we calculated hospital-level, risk-adjusted rates of postacute care use for both inpatient facilities (IF) and home health care (HHC), and examined the association of these rates with hospital quality measures, including mortality, complications, readmissions, and length of stay. RESULTS: Of 112,620 patients treated at 217 hospitals, 18.6% were discharged to an IF, and 19.9% were discharged with HHC. Even after adjusting for differences in patient and hospital characteristics, hospitals varied widely in their use of both IF (mean, 20.3%; range, 2.7%-39.7%) and HHC (mean, 22.3%; range, 3.1%-57.8%). A hospital's risk-adjusted postoperative mortality rate or complication rate was not significantly associated with its use of postacute care, but higher 30-day readmission rates were associated with higher use of IF (24.1% vs. 21.2%, P=0.03). Hospitals with longer average length of stay used IF less frequently (19.4% vs. 24.4%, P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals vary widely in their use of postacute care. Although hospital use of postacute care was not associated with risk-adjusted complication or mortality rates, hospitals with high readmission rates and shorter lengths of stay used inpatient postacute care more frequently. To reduce variations in care, better criteria are needed to identify which patients benefit most from these services.