Evidence Review for the American College of Surgeons Quality Verification Part III: Standardization, Protocols, and Achieving Better Outcomes for Patient Care.

BACKGROUND: After decades of experience supporting surgical quality and safety by the American College of Surgeons, the ACS Quality Verification Program (ACS QVP) was developed to help hospitals improve surgical quality and safety. This review is the final installment of a three-part review aimed to synthesize evidence supporting the main principles of the ACS QVP. STUDY DESIGN: Evidence was systematically reviewed for three principles: standardized team-based care across five phases of surgical care, disease-based management, and external regulatory review. MEDLINE was searched for articles published from inception to January 2019 and two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion in a hierarchical fashion, extracted data, and summarized results in a narrative fashion. A total of 5,237 studies across these three topics were identified. Studies were included if they evaluated the relationship between the standard of interest and patient-level or organization measures within the last twenty years. RESULTS: After applying inclusion criteria, a total of 150 studies in systematic reviews and primary studies were included for assessment. Despite institutional variation in standardized clinical pathways, evidence demonstrated improved outcomes such as reduced length of stay (LOS), costs, and complications. Evidence for multidisciplinary disease-based care protocols was mixed, though trended towards improving patient outcomes such as reduced LOS and readmissions. Similarly, the evidence for accreditation and adherence to external process measures was also mixed, though several studies demonstrated the benefit of accreditation programs on patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The identified literature supports the importance of standardized multidisciplinary and disease-based processes and external regulatory systems to improve quality of care.

What They Are Not Telling Us: Analysis of Nonresponders on a National Survey of Resident Well-Being.

To characterize nonrespondents to a national survey about trainee well-being, examine response patterns to questions of sensitive nature, and assess how nonresponse biases prevalence estimates of mistreatment and well-being. Background: Surgical trainees are at risk for burnout and mistreatment, which are discernible only by self-report. Therefore, prevalence estimates may be biased by nonresponse. Methods: A survey was administered with the 2018 and 2019 American Board of Surgery In-Training Examinations assessing demographics, dissatisfaction with education and career, mistreatment, burnout, thoughts of attrition, and suicidality. Responders in 2019 were characterized as survey "Completers," "Discontinuers" (quit before the end), and "Selective Responders" (selectively answered questions throughout). Multivariable logistic regression assessed associations of respondent type with mistreatment and well-being outcomes, adjusting for individual and program characteristics. Longitudinal survey identifiers linked survey responses for eligible trainees between 2018 and 2019 surveys to further inform nonresponse patterns. Results: In 2019, 6956 (85.6%) of 8129 eligible trainees initiated the survey, with 66.5% Completers, 17.5% Discontinuers, and 16.0% Selective Responders. Items with the highest response rates included dissatisfaction with education and career (93.2%), burnout (86.3%), thoughts of attrition (90.8%), and suicidality (94.4%). Discontinuers and Selective Responders were more often junior residents and racially/ethnically minoritized than Completers. No differences were seen in burnout and suicidality rates between Discontinuers, Selective Responders, and Completers. Non-White or Hispanic residents were more likely to skip questions about racial/ethnic discrimination than non-Hispanic White residents (21.2% vs 15.8%; odds ratio [OR], 1.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-1.53), particularly when asked to identify the source. Women were not more likely to omit questions regarding gender/gender identity/sexual orientation discrimination (OR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.79-1.04) or its sources (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.16). Both Discontinuers and Selective Responders more frequently reported physical abuse (2.5% vs 1.1%; P = 0.001) and racial discrimination (18.3% vs 13.6%; P < 0.001) on the previous survey (2018) than Completers. Conclusions: Overall response rates are high for this survey. Prevalence estimates of burnout, suicidality, and gender discrimination are likely minimally impacted by nonresponse. Nonresponse to survey items about racial/ethnic discrimination by racially/ethnically minoritized residents likely results in underestimation of this type of mistreatment.

Successful Implementation of Enhanced Recovery in Elective Colorectal Surgery is Variable and Dependent on the Local Environment.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate local hospital success with enhanced recovery implementation as measured by colorectal surgery process measure (PM) compliance and characterize local environment factors associated with success within a contemporary quality improvement collaborative. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Enhanced recovery programs (ERP) have proven an effective perioperative quality improvement strategy, but local variation in implementation can hinder patient outcome improvement. METHODS: Individual hospitals participating in a national colorectal ERP quality improvement program were evaluated with quantitative (patient-level process and outcome) and qualitative (survey and structured interviews with hospital teams) data between 2017 and 2020. Hospitals with implementation success were identified: high performers (80% of elective colorectal surgery patients compliant with >6/9 PMs) and high improvers (top quartile of PM adherence improvement over time). Hospital and implementation characteristics were compared with chi-square tests. Trends in average annual outcome change were estimated with logistic and linear regression. RESULTS: Of 207 total hospitals, 62 were characterized as High Performance and 52 as High Improvement. High Performance hospitals were larger, with more annual colorectal surgeries (128 vs 101, P = 0.039). Qualitative assessment revealed fewer barriers of staff buy-in and competing priorities, and more experience with standardized perioperative care in High Performance hospitals. High Improvement hospitals had lower baseline PM adherence (54.1% vs 69.6%, P < 0.001) and less experience with standardized perioperative care (30.8% vs 58.1%, P < 0.001) but were noted to have a positive trend in annual patient outcomes: annual morbidity (Δ-1.14% vs -0.20%, P = 0.035), readmission (Δ-1.85% vs 0.002%, P = 0.037), and prolonged length of stay (Δ-3.94 vs -1.19, P = 0.037) compared to Low Improvement hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: When evaluating a collection of hospitals implementing ERP, only half of hospitals reached consistent High Performance or high improvement. Characteristics of the local environment need further study to understand the barriers to effective implementation in a pragmatic setting.