Life after "no": barriers to behavior change for persons declined hernia repair due to high-risk features.

INTRODUCTION: Delaying an elective operation to mitigate risk factors improves patient outcomes. Elective ventral hernia repair is one such example. To address this issue, we developed a pre-operative optimization clinic to support high-risk patients seeking elective ventral hernia repair. Unfortunately, few patients progressed to surgery. Within this context, we sought to understand the barriers to behavior change among these patients with the goal of improving care for patients undergoing elective surgery. METHODS: We performed semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 20 patients who were declined ventral hernia repair due to either active tobacco use or obesity. Patients were recruited from a pre-operative optimization clinic at an academic hospital. Interviews sought to characterize patients' perceived barriers to behavior change. Interviews were concluded once thematic saturation was reached. We used an inductive thematic analysis to analyze the data. All data analysis was performed using MAXQDA software. RESULTS: Among 20 patients (mean age 50, 65% female, 65% White), none had yet undergone ventral hernia repair. While most patients had a positive experience in the clinic, among those who did not, we found three dominant themes around behavior change: (1) Patient's role in behavior change: how the patient perceived their role in making behavior changes optimize their health for surgery; (2) Obtainability of offered resources: the need for more support for patients to access the recommended healthcare; and (3) Patient-provider concordance: the extent to which patients and providers agree on the relative importance of different attributes of their care. CONCLUSION: Behavior change prior to elective surgery is complex and multifaceted. While improving access to tobacco cessation resources and obesity management may improve outcomes for some, patients may benefit from increased on-site facilitation to promote access to resources as well as the use of patient-facing decision support tools to promote patient-provider concordance.

Prescribed Opioid Dosages, Payer Type, and Self-Reported Outcomes After Surgical Procedures in Michigan, 2018-2020.

Importance: Collaborative quality improvement (CQI) models, often supported by private payers, create hospital networks to improve health care delivery. Recently, these systems have focused on opioid stewardship; however, it is unclear whether reduction in postoperative opioid prescribing occurs uniformly across health insurance payer types. Objective: To evaluate the association between insurance payer type, postoperative opioid prescription size, and patient-reported outcomes in a large statewide CQI model. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used data from 70 hospitals within the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative clinical registry for adult patients (age ≥18 years) undergoing general, colorectal, vascular, or gynecologic surgical procedures between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2020. Exposure: Insurance type, classified as private, Medicare, or Medicaid. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was postoperative opioid prescription size in milligrams of oral morphine equivalents (OME). Secondary outcomes were patient-reported opioid consumption, refill rate, satisfaction, pain, quality of life, and regret about undergoing surgery. Results: A total of 40 149 patients (22 921 [57.1%] female; mean [SD] age, 53 [17] years) underwent surgery during the study period. Within this cohort, 23 097 patients (57.5%) had private insurance, 10 667 (26.6%) had Medicare, and 6385 (15.9%) had Medicaid. Unadjusted opioid prescription size decreased for all 3 groups during the study period from 115 to 61 OME for private insurance patients, from 96 to 53 OME for Medicare patients, and from 132 to 65 OME for Medicaid patients. A total of 22 665 patients received a postoperative opioid prescription and had follow-up data for opioid consumption and refill. The rate of opioid consumption was highest among Medicaid patients throughout the study period (16.82 OME [95% CI, 12.57-21.07 OME] greater than among patients with private insurance) but increased the least over time. The odds of refill significantly decreased over time for patients with Medicaid compared with patients with private insurance (odds ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.89-0.98). Adjusted refill rates for private insurance remained between 3.0% and 3.1% over the study period; adjusted refill rates among Medicare and Medicaid patients decreased from 4.7% to 3.1% and 6.5% to 3.4%, respectively, by the end of the study period. Conclusions and Relevance: In this retrospective cohort study of surgical patients in Michigan from 2018 to 2020, postoperative opioid prescription size decreased across all payer types, and differences between groups narrowed over time. Although funded by private payers, the CQI model appeared to have benefitted patients with Medicare and Medicaid as well.

Surgeon behaviors related to engaging patients in smoking cessation at the time of elective surgery.

BACKGROUND: Despite the abundance of evidence supporting smoking cessation before elective surgery, there is wide variation in surgeon adherence to these best practices. METHODS: This qualitative study used convenience sampling to recruit General Surgery trained surgeons. Surgeons participated in semi-structured interviews based on domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Content analysis was guided by the TDF. RESULTS: Of the 14 TDF domains, social or professional role/identity, memory, attention and decision processes, environmental context and resources, and beliefs about consequences emerged most frequently. Mapping these domains to the Behavior Change Wheel identified education, enablement, and incentivization as effective intervention functions. CONCLUSIONS: Using the TDF, this study identified a widespread sense of responsibility among surgeons to engage patients in perioperative smoking cessation despite workplace barriers and lacking resources. These findings provide valuable insight to facilitate surgeon participation in health promotion through targeted, theory-based interventions informed by surgeon identified barriers to perioperative smoking cessation.

A qualitative analysis describing attrition from bariatric surgery to identify strategies for improving retention in patients who desire treatment.

BACKGROUND: Among patients who express interest in bariatric surgery, dropout rates from bariatric surgery programs are reported as high as 60%. There is a lack of understanding how we can better support patients to obtain treatment of this serious chronic disease. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews with individuals who dropped out of bariatric surgery programs from three clinical sites were conducted. Transcripts were iteratively analyzed to understand patterns clustering around codes. We mapped these codes to domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) which will serve as the basis of future theory-based interventions. RESULTS: Twenty patients who self-identified as 60% female and 85% as non-Hispanic White were included. The results clustered around codes of "perceptions of bariatric surgery," "reasons for not undergoing surgery," and "factors for re-considering surgery." Major drivers of attrition were burden of pre-operative workup requirements, stigma against bariatric surgery, fear of surgery, and anticipated regret. The number and time for requirements led patients to lose their initial optimism about improving health. Perceptions regarding being seen as weak for choosing bariatric surgery, fear of surgery itself, and possible regret over surgery grew as time passed. These drivers mapped to four TDF domains: environmental context and resources, social role and identity, emotion, and beliefs about consequences, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study uses the TDF to identify areas of greatest concern for patients to be used for intervention design. This is the first step in understanding how we best support patients who express interest in bariatric surgery achieve their goals and live healthier lives.

Application of Component Separation and Short-Term Outcomes in Ventral Hernia Repairs.

INTRODUCTION: Component separation (CS) techniques have evolved in recent years. How surgeons apply the various CS techniques, anterior component separation (aCS) versus posterior component separation (pCS), by patient and hernia-specific factors remain unknown in the general population. Improving the quality of ventral hernia repair (VHR) on a large scale requires an understanding of current practice variations and how these variations ultimately affect patient care. In this study, we examine the application of CS techniques and the associated short-term outcomes while taking into consideration patient and hernia-specific factors. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a clinically rich statewide hernia registry, the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry, of persons older than 18 y who underwent VHR between January 2020 and July 2021. The exposure of interest was the use of CS. Our primary outcome was a composite end point of 30-d adverse events including any complication, emergency department visit, readmission, and reoperation. Our secondary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI). Multivariable logistic regression examined the association of CS use, 30-d adverse events, and SSI with patient-, hernia-, and operative-specific variables. We performed a sensitivity analysis evaluating for differences in application and outcomes of the posterior and aCS techniques. RESULTS: A total of 1319 patients underwent VHR, with a median age (interquartile range) of 55 y (22), 641 (49%) female patients, and a median body mass index of 32 (9) kg/m2. CS was used in 138 (11%) patients, of which 101 (73%) were pCS and 37 (27%) were aCS. Compared to patients without CS, patients undergoing a CS had larger median hernia widths (2.5 cm (range 0.01-23 cm) versus 8 cm (1-30 cm), P < 0.001). Of the CS cases, 49 (36%) performed in hernias less than 6 cm in size. Following multivariate regression, factors independently associated with the use of a CS were diabetes (odds ratio [OR]: 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-3.36), previous hernia repair (OR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.20-2.96), hernia width (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.22-1.34), and an open approach (OR: 3.83, 95% CI: 2.24-6.53). Compared to patients not having a CS, use of a CS was associated with increased odds of 30-d adverse events (OR: 1.88 95% CI: 1.13-3.12) but was not associated with SSI (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 0.74-4.63). Regression analysis demonstrated no differences in 30-d adverse events or SSI between the pCS and aCS techniques. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first population-level report of patients undergoing VHR with concurrent posterior or aCS. These data suggest wide variation in the application of CS in VHR and raises a concern for potential overutilization in smaller hernias. Continued analysis of CS application and the associated outcomes, specifically recurrence, is necessary and underway.

The impact of frailty on ventral hernia repair outcomes in a statewide database.

INTRODUCTION: Preoperative frailty is a strong predictor of postoperative morbidity in the general surgery population. Despite this, there are a paucity of research examining the effect of frailty on outcomes after ventral hernia repair (VHR), one of the most common abdominal operations in the USA. We examined the association of frailty with short-term postoperative outcomes while accounting for differences in preoperative, operative, and hernia characteristics. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the Michigan Surgery Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) for adult patients who underwent VHR between January 2020 and January 2022. Patient frailty was assessed using the validated 5-factor modified frailty index (mFI5) and categorized as follows: no (mFI5 = 0), moderate (mFI5 = 1), and severe frailty (mFI5 ≥ 2). Our primary outcome was any 30-day complication. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association of frailty with outcomes while controlling for patient, operative, and hernia variables. RESULTS: A total of 4406 patients underwent VHR with a mean age (SD) of 55 (15) years, 2015 (46%) females, and 3591 (82%) white patients. The mean (SD) BMI of the cohort was 33 (8) kg/m2. A total of 2077 (47%) patients had no frailty, 1604 (36%) were moderately frail, and 725 (17%) were severely frail. The median hernia size (interquartile range) was 2.5 cm (1.5-4.0 cm). Severe frailty was associated with increased odds of any complication (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR) 3.12, 95% CI 1.78-5.47), serious complication (aOR 5.25, 95% CI 2.17-13.19), SSI (aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.58-7.34), and post-discharge adverse events (aOR 1.70, 95% CI 1.24-2.33). CONCLUSION: After controlling for patient, operative, and hernia characteristics, frailty was independently associated with increased odds of postoperative complications. These findings highlight the importance of preoperative frailty assessment for risk stratification and to inform patient counseling.

Hospital-level variation in mesh use for ventral and incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Placement of prosthetic mesh during ventral and incisional hernia repair has been shown to reduce the incidence of postoperative hernia recurrence. Consequently, multiple consensus guidelines recommend the use of mesh for ventral hernias of any size. However, the extent to which real-world practice patterns reflect these recommendations is unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) to identify patients undergoing clean ventral or incisional hernia repair between January 1, 2020 and December 31, 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. We used two-step hierarchical logistic regression modeling with empirical Bayes estimates to evaluate the association of hospital-level mesh use with patient, operative, and hernia characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 5262 patients underwent ventral and incisional hernia repair at 65 hospitals with a mean age of 53.8 (14.5) years, 2292 (43.6%) females, and a mean hernia width of 3.2 (3.4) cm. Mean hospital volume was 81 (49) cases. Mesh was used in 4098 (77.9%) patients. At the patient level, hernia width and surgical approach were significantly associated with mesh use. Specifically, mesh use was 6.2% (95% CI 4.8-7.5%) more likely with each additional centimeter of hernia width and 28.0% (95% CI 26.1-29.8%) more likely for minimally invasive repair compared to open repair. At the hospital level, there was wide variation in mesh use, ranging from 38.0% (95% CI 31.5-44.9%) to 96.4% (95% CI 95.3-97.2%). Hospital-level mesh use was not associated with differences in hernia size (ß = - 0.003, P = 0.978), surgical approach (ß = - 1.109, P = 0.414), or any other patient factors. CONCLUSIONS: Despite strong evidence supporting the use of mesh in ventral and incisional hernia repair, there is substantial variation in mesh use between hospitals that is not explained by differences in patient characteristics or operative approach. This suggests that opportunities exist to standardize surgical practice to better align with evidence supporting the use of mesh in the management of these hernias.

Sex disparities in the treatment and outcomes of ventral and incisional hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: Despite females accounting for nearly half of ventral and incisional hernia repairs performed each year in the United States, shockingly little attention has been paid to sex disparities in hernia treatment and outcomes. We explored sex-based differences in operative approach and outcomes using a population-level hernia registry. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry (MSQC-HR) to identify patients undergoing clean ventral or incisional hernia repair between January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2021. The primary outcomes were risk-adjusted rates of laparoscopic/robotic approach, mesh use, and composite 30-day adverse events stratified by sex. Risk adjustment between sex was performed using all patient, clinical, and hernia characteristics. RESULTS: 5269 patients underwent ventral and incisional hernia repair of whom 2295 (43.6%) patients were female. Mean age was 53.9 (14.5) years. Females had slightly larger hernias (3.5 cm vs. 3.0 cm, P < 0.001), fewer umbilical hernias (50.9% vs. 73.0%, P < 0.001), and a higher prevalence of prior hernia repair (17.9% vs. 13.4%, P < 0.001). In a multivariable logistic regression adjusting for differences between males and females, female sex was associated with lower odds of mesh use [aOR 0.62 (95% CI 0.52-0.74)] and higher odds of laparoscopic/robotic repair [aOR 1.26 (95% CI 1.10-1.44)]. In a similar multivariable model, female sex was also associated with significantly higher odds of composite 30-day adverse events [aOR 1.64 (95% CI 1.32-2.02)]. This equates to predicted probabilities of 11.7% (95% CI 10.3-13.0%) vs. 7.6% (95% CI 6.6-8.6%) for adverse events in females compared to males. CONCLUSIONS: Despite being younger and having fewer comorbidities, women were more likely to experience adverse events after surgery. Moreover, women were less likely to have mesh placed. Additional work is needed to understand the factors that drive these gender disparities in ventral hernia treatment and outcomes.

Postacute Care Utilization and Episode of Care Payments Following Common Elective Operations.

OBJECTIVE: To describe PAC utilization and associated payments for patients undergoing common elective procedures. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Utilization and costs of PAC are well described for benchmarked conditions and operations but remain understudied for common elective procedures. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of adult patients in a statewide administrative claims database undergoing elective cholecystectomy, ventral or incisional hernia repair (VIHR), and groin hernia repair from 2012 to 2019. We used multivariable logistic regression to estimate the odds of PAC utilization, and multivariable linear regression to determine the association of 90-day episode of care payments and PAC utilization. RESULTS: Among 34,717 patients undergoing elective cholecystectomy, 0.7% utilized PAC resulting in significantly higher payments ($19,047 vs $7830, P < 0.001). Among 29,826 patients undergoing VIHR, 1.7% utilized PAC resulting in significantly higher payments ($19,766 vs $9439, P < 0.001). Among 37,006 patients undergoing groin hernia repair, 0.3% utilized PAC services resulting in significantly higher payments ($14,886 vs $8062, P < 0.001). We found both modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors associated with PAC utilization. Morbid obesity was associated with PAC utilization following VIHR [odds ratio (OR) 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-2.02, P < 0.001]. Male sex was associated with lower odds of PAC utilization for VIHR (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.35-0.51, P < 0.001) and groin hernia repair (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39-0.98, P = 0.039). CONCLUSIONS: We found both modifiable (eg, obesity) and nonmodifiable (eg, female sex) patient factors that were associated with PAC. Optimizing patients to reduce PAC utilization requires an understanding of patient risk factors and systems and processes to address these factors.

Ventral hernia repair and mesh use in females of childbearing age.

BACKGROUND: A substantial knowledge gap exists in understanding sex as a biological variable for abdominal wall hernia repair, which also extends to hernia repair practices in females of childbearing age. We sought to determine the incidence of mesh repairs in females of childbearing age and to characterize factors associated with mesh use. METHODS: Using a statewide hernia-specific data registry, we conducted a retrospective study identifying females of childbearing age, defined as 18-44 per CDC guidelines, who underwent clean ventral hernia repair between January 2020 and Dec 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with mesh use. To further delineate whether childbearing status may affect decision to use mesh, we also examined mesh practice stratified by age, comparing women 18 to 44 to those 45 and older. RESULTS: Eight hundred and thirty-six females of childbearing age underwent ventral hernia repair with a mean age of 34.8 (6.2) years. Mesh was used in 547 (65.4%) patients. Mesh use was significantly associated with minimally invasive approach [aOR 29.46 (95% CI 16.30-53.25)], greater hernia width [aOR 1.50 (95% CI 1.20-1.88)], and greater BMI [aOR 1.05 (95% CI 1.03-1.08)]. Age was not significantly associated with mesh use [aOR 1.02 (95% CI 0.99-1.05)]. Compared to 1,461 female patients older than 44 years old, there was no significant association between childbearing age and mesh use [aOR 0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.04)]. CONCLUSIONS: Most females of childbearing age had mesh placed during ventral and incisional hernia repair, which was largely associated with hernia size, BMI, and a minimally invasive surgical approach. Neither chronologic patient age nor being of childbearing age were associated with mesh use. Insofar as existing evidence suggests that childbearing status is an important factor in deciding whether to use mesh, these findings suggest that real-world practice may not reflect that evidence.

Variation of ventral and incisional hernia repairs in kidney transplant recipients.

INTRODUCTION: As survivorship following kidney transplant continues to improve, so does the probability of intervening on common surgical conditions, such as ventral or incisional hernia, in this population. Ventral hernia management is known to vary across institutions and this variation has an impact on patient outcomes. We sought to evaluate hospital level variation of ventral or incisional hernia repair (VIHR) in the kidney transplant population. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 100% inpatient Medicare claims to identify patients who underwent kidney transplant between 2007 and 2018. The primary outcome was 1- and 3-year ventral or incisional risk- and reliability-adjusted VIHR rates. Patient and hospital characteristics were evaluated across risk- and reliability-adjusted VIHR rate tertiles. Models were adjusted for age, sex, race, and Elixhauser comorbidities. RESULTS: Overall, 139,741 patients underwent kidney transplant during the study period with a mean age (SD) of 51.6 (13.7) years. 84,717 (60.6%) were male, and 72,657 (52.0%) were white. Median follow up time was 5.4 years. 2098 (1.50%) patients underwent VIHR. the 1 year risk- and reliability-adjusted hernia repair rates were 0.49% (95% Conf idence Interval (CI) 0.48-0.51, range 0.31-0.59) in tertile 1, 0.63% (95% CI 0.62-0.63, range 0.59-0.68) in tertile 2, and 0.98 (95% CI 0.91-1.05, range 0.68-2.94) in tertile 3. Accordingly, compared to hospitals in tertile 1, the odds of post-transplant hernia repair tertile 2 hospitals were 1.78 (95% CI 1.37-2.31) and at tertile 3 hospitals 3.53 (95% CI 2.87-4.33). CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of Medicare patients undergoing kidney transplant, the overall cumulative incidence of hernia repair varied substantially across hospital tertiles. Patient and hospital characteristics varied across tertile, most notably in diabetes and obesity. Future research is needed to understand if program and surgeon level factors are contributing to the observed variation in treatment of this common disease.

Incidence and trends of decision regret following elective hernia repair.

BACKGROUND: One approach to evaluate decision-making is using the concept of decision regret, which measures patient remorse after a healthcare decision. This is particularly important for elective, preference-sensitive conditions with multiple treatment options, such as ventral and inguinal hernia repair. In this study, we assessed decision regret among patients who pursued surgical management of ventral and inguinal hernias. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed a statewide registry of adult patients who underwent elective ventral and inguinal hernia repair between January 2017 and March 2020 and completed a validated survey measuring decision regret. 30-day outcomes included complications, emergency department (ED) utilization, readmission, and reoperation. Multivariable logistic regression examined the association of regret with age, sex, race, insurance status, ASA, tobacco use, diabetes, admission status, surgical approach (open vs. laparoscopic vs. robotic), year, and outcomes. RESULTS: 8315 patients underwent surgery during the study period with a mean age of 60.5 (14.7) years and 1812 (22%) female patients. Among 2159 patients who underwent ventral hernia repair, 248 (11%) reported regret to undergo surgery, 64 (3%) experienced a complication, 160 (7%) visited an ED, 86 (4%) were readmitted, and 29 (1%) underwent reoperation. Outcomes associated with regret after ventral hernia repair included complications (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.26-4.29) and readmission (OR 2.67, 95% CI 1.51-4.71). Among 6,156 patients who underwent inguinal hernia repair, 533 (9%) reported regret to undergo surgery, 41 (1%) experienced a complication, 304 (5%) visited an ED, 72 (1%) were readmitted, and 63 (1%) underwent reoperation. Outcomes associated with regret after inguinal hernia repair included ED visits (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.44-2.87) and readmission (OR 4.23, 95% CI 2.35-7.61). CONCLUSION: Roughly 1 in 10 patients undergoing hernia repair report regret with their decision to undergo surgery. Developing a better understanding of the factors associated with decision regret after hernia repair may better inform both patients and surgeon decision-making.

Variation in approach for small (< 2 cm) ventral hernias across a statewide quality improvement collaborative.

INTRODUCTION: Operative technique for hernias < 2 cm is highly controversial. Limited data exist about this practice at a population level. Within this context we sought to describe practice patterns and use of mesh among patients undergoing repair of small hernias within the setting of a statewide quality improvement collaborative. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing hernia repair in the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry was conducted. Patients who underwent repair of a hernia < 2 cm from January 1, 2020 to July 8, 2021 were included. Descriptive statistics were performed to describe cohort characteristics and compare patients who did and did not receive mesh. Logistic regression was performed to estimate the odds of receiving mesh after accounting for patient and hernia characteristics. RESULTS: Among 570 patients, 56.1% (n = 320) had mesh placed. Most repairs were conducted via open approach (n = 437, 76.5%). Patients who received mesh were older (51.8 vs 48.6, p < 0.01), had higher BMI (31.7 vs 30.0, p < 0.01), were more often ASA Class III (35.9% vs 24.4%, p < 0.01), more often had diabetes (15.9% vs 10.0%, 0.04) and hypertension (44.7% vs 30.4%, p < 0.01), and had higher hernia width (1.2 cm vs 1.0 cm, p < 0.0001). After adjustment, ASA Class III (aOR 3.41, 95% CI 1.31-8.89), current smoking status (aOR 1.81, 95% CI 1.04-3.18), higher mean hernia width (aOR 5.68, 95% CI 2.97-10.85), and laparoscopic (aOR 12.9, 95% CI 5.02-32.96) or robotic (aOR 24.3, 95% CI 6.96-84.96) were associated with mesh use, while COPD (aOR 0.36, 95% CI 0.07-0.96) was associated with less mesh use. CONCLUSIONS: Use of mesh for small hernias remains controversial. We found that patients who had mesh placed at the time of surgery were potentially patients at higher risk for complications. The decision to use mesh may be driven by patient-related factors that predispose to complications and operative recurrence rather than evidence indicating that it is superior in this population.

Demographic Factors Associated With Research and Career Interests in Aspiring Academic Surgeons: What are the Implications for Tomorrow's Workforce?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the research and career interests of aspiring academic surgeons and determine the influence of demographic factors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey SETTING: Single institution, academic general surgery residency program PARTICIPANTS: Medical students invited to interview during 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 residency cycle RESULTS: One hundred fifty-four of 160 (96%) potential respondents representing 63 medical schools completed the survey, American Association for Public Opinion Research Response Rate 6. Fifty-three percent of the study population was female. Seventeen percent identified as Black, 14% Asian, 13% Latinx, 50% white, and 6% other. Respondents were most interested in education, professional development, and surgical culture (32%) followed by basic and translational science (23%), global and community health (20%), and health services (18%). On multiple logistic regression, interest in global/community health was associated with identifying as Black (OR 5.9 [2.0, 17.8] p = 0.001) and female (OR 2.7 [1.0, 7.0] p = 0.044). A plurality of participants were undecided on future specialty (n = 63, 41%). The most common specialty interests were surgical oncology (n = 28, 18%); trauma, acute care, or surgical critical care (n = 21, 14%); pediatric and cardiothoracic surgery (n = 20 for each, 13%); and abdominal transplant (n = 15, 10%). CONCLUSIONS: In this cross-sectional survey of highly competitive academic general surgery applicants, respondents who were underrepresented in medicine (URiM) and women were more interested in research fields with a history of lower relative NIH funding. In light of these findings, academic programs seeking a more diverse residency workforce should consider strategies beyond recruitment to promote the scholarly achievement of women and URiM residents.

Surgeon Variation in the Application of Robotic Technique for Abdominal Hernia Repair: A Mixed-Methods Study.

INTRODUCTION: Although the utilization of robotic technique for abdominal hernia repair has increased rapidly, there is no consensus as to when it should be applied for optimal outcomes. High variability exists within surgeon practices regarding how they use this technology, and the factors that drive robotic utilization remain largely unknown. This study aims to explore the motivating factors associated with surgeons' decisions to utilize a robotic approach for abdominal hernia repair. METHODS: An exploratory mixed-methods approach was utilized. Surgeons who performed abdominal hernia repairs were interviewed to identify impactful themes motivating surgical approach. This informed a retrospective analysis of ventral hernia repairs performed in 2020 within the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative. Surgeon robotic utilization rates were calculated. Among selective robotic users, multivariable regression evaluated the patient and hernia factors associated with robotic utilization. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis of 21 interviews revealed three dominant themes in the decision to utilize robotic technology: access and resources, surgeon comfort, and market factors. Among 71 surgeons caring for 1174 hernia patients, robotic utilization rates ranged from 0% to 98% of cases. There were 27 surgeons identified as selective robotic users, who cared for 423 patients. Multivariable regression revealed that hernia location was the only factor associated with robotic technique, with non-midline hernias associated with a 4.47 (95% confidence interval 1.34-14.88) higher odds of robotic repair than epigastric hernias. CONCLUSIONS: Major drivers of robotic technique for hernia repair were found to be perceived benefits and availability, rather than patient or hernia characteristics. These data will contribute to an understanding of surgeon decision-making and help develop improvements to patient care.

Opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing after COVID-19 hospitalization.

Opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing after COVID-19 hospitalization is not well understood. We aimed to characterize opioid and benzodiazepine prescribing among naïve patients hospitalized for COVID and to identify the risk factors associated with a new prescription at discharge. In this retrospective study of patients across 39 Michigan hospitals from March to November 2020, we identified 857 opioid- and benzodiazepine-naïve patients admitted with COVID-19 not requiring mechanical ventilation. Of these, 22% received opioids, 13% received benzodiazepines, and 6% received both during the hospitalization. At discharge, 8% received an opioid prescription, and 3% received a benzodiazepine prescription. After multivariable adjustment, receipt of an opioid or benzodiazepine prescription at discharge was associated with the length of inpatient opioid or benzodiazepine exposure. These findings suggest that hospitalization represents a risk of opioid or benzodiazepine initiation among naïve patients, and judicious prescribing should be considered to prevent opioid-related harms.

Factors associated with disease-free and abdominal recurrence-free survival in abdominopelvic and retroperitoneal sarcomas.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Retroperitoneal and abdominopelvic sarcomas are rare heterogeneous malignancies. The only therapy proven to improve disease-free survival (DFS) is R0/R1 surgical resection. We sought to analyze whether additional factors such as radiation and systemic therapy were associated with DFS and abdominal recurrence-free survival (RFS). METHODS: Retrospective review of adults (≥18) with resectable abdominopelvic and retroperitoneal sarcomas who underwent intent-to-cure surgery at a high-volume tertiary referral center between 1998 and 2015. The main outcome measures were DFS and abdominal RFS. RESULTS: Overall, 159 patients met the criteria for inclusion. Median follow-up was 4.8 years (range 0.1-18.9 years). The most common histology was liposarcoma (49%). Systemic therapy was administered to 48% of patients and was not associated with improved outcomes. The neoadjuvant radiotherapy group (11%) had improved adjusted DFS (5.46 years, 95% CI [3.68, 7.24] vs. 3.1 years, 95% CI [2.48, 3.73]) and abdominal RFS (6.14 years, 95% CI [4.38, 7.89] vs. 3.22 years, 95% CI [2.61, 3.84]). The adjuvant radiotherapy group (19%) had no improvement. CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of patients undergoing resection for retroperitoneal or abdominopelvic sarcoma, neoadjuvant radiation improved DFS and abdominal RFS. A follow-up of over three years was needed to appreciate a difference in outcomes.

Implementation of a synoptic operative note for abdominal wall hernia repair: a statewide pilot evaluating completeness and communication of intraoperative details.

BACKGROUND: Variable approaches to intraoperative communication impede our understanding of surgical decision-making and best practices. This is critical among hernia repairs, where improved outcomes are reliant on understanding the impact of different patient characteristics and surgical approaches. In this context, a hernia-specific synoptic operative note was piloted as part of an effort to create a statewide hernia registry. We aimed to understand the impact of the synoptic operative note on variable missingness and evaluate barriers and facilitators to improved intraoperative communication and note adoption. METHODS: In January 2020, the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) registry was expanded to capture hernia-specific intraoperative variables. A synoptic operative note for hernia repair was piloted at 8 hospitals. The primary outcome was change in hernia variable communication, measured by missingness. Using a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, we performed semi-structured interviews with data abstractors (n = 4) and surgeons (n = 4) at 5 pilot sites to assess barriers and facilitators of implementation. Interviews were iteratively analyzed using content analysis with both deductive and inductive approaches. RESULTS: From January to June 2020, 870 hernia repairs were performed across 8 pilot and 53 control sites. Pilot sites had significantly less missingness for all hernia-specific variables. At pilot sites, 46% of notes were fully complete in regard to hernia variables, compared to 21% at control sites (p value < 0.001). While collection of intraoperative variables improved after synoptic note implementation, low note adoption was reported. Facilitators of improved variable collection were (1) communication with data abstractors and (2) stakeholder acknowledgment of widespread benefit, while barriers included (1) surgeon resistance to practice change, (2) EMR/technology, and (3) interruptions to communication and implementation. CONCLUSION: This mixed-methods evaluation of a synoptic operative note implementation suggests that sustained communication, particularly with abstractors, was the most impactful intervention. Future implementation efforts may have improved effectiveness with interventions supplementary to surgeon-level direction.

Outcomes of a Presurgical Optimization Program for Elective Hernia Repairs Among High-risk Patients.

Importance: Preoperative optimization is an important clinical strategy for reducing morbidity; however, nearly 25% of persons undergoing elective abdominal hernia repairs are not optimized with respect to weight or substance use. Although the preoperative period represents a unique opportunity to motivate patient health behavior changes, fear of emergent presentation and financial concerns are often cited as clinician barriers to optimization. Objective: To evaluate the feasibility of evidence-based patient optimization before surgery by implementing a low-cost preoperative optimization clinic. Design, Setting, and Participants: This quality improvement study was conducted 1 year after a preoperative optimization clinic was implemented for high-risk patients seeking elective hernia repair. The median (range) follow-up was 197 (39-378) days. A weekly preoperative optimization clinic was implemented in 2019 at a single academic center. Referral occurred for persons seeking elective hernia repair with a body mass index greater than or equal to 40, age 75 years or older, or active tobacco use. Data analysis was performed from February to July 2020. Exposures: Enrolled patients were provided health resources and longitudinal multidisciplinary care. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcomes were safety and eligibility for surgery after participating in the optimization clinic. The hypothesis was that the optimization clinic could preoperatively mitigate patient risk factors, without increasing patient risk. Safety was defined as the occurrence of complications during participation in the optimization clinic. The secondary outcome metric centered on the financial impact of implementing the preoperative optimization program. Results: Of the 165 patients enrolled in the optimization clinic, most were women (90 patients [54.5%]) and White (145 patients [87.9%]). The mean (SD) age was 59.4 (15.8) years. Patients' eligibility for the clinic was distributed across high-risk criteria: 37.0% (61 patients) for weight, 26.1% (43 patients) for tobacco use, and 23.6% (39 patients) for age. Overall, 9.1% of persons (15 patients) were successfully optimized for surgery, and tobacco cessation was achieved in 13.8% of smokers (8 patients). The rate of hernia incarceration requiring emergent surgery was 3.0% (5 patients). Economic evaluation found increased operative yield from surgical clinics, with a 58% increase in hernia-attributed relative value units without altering surgeon workflow. Conclusions and Relevance: In this quality improvement study, a hernia optimization clinic safely improved management of high-risk patients and increased operative yield for the institution. This represents an opportunity to create sustainable and scalable models that provide longitudinal care and optimize patients to improve outcomes of hernia repair.

Leveraging a statewide quality collaborative to understand population-level hernia care.

BACKGROUND: Although ventral hernia repair (VHR) is extremely common, there is profound variation in operative technique and outcomes. This study describes the results of a statewide registry capturing hernia-specific variables to understand population-level practice patterns. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of adult patients in a new statewide hernia registry undergoing VHR in 2020. RESULTS: 919 patients underwent VHR across 57 hospitals and 279 surgeons. Hernia width was <2 cm in 233 (25%) patients, 2-5 cm in 420 (46%) patients, 5-10 cm in 171 (19%) patients, and >10 cm in 95 (10%) patients. Mesh was used in 79% of cases and varied in use from 53% of hernias <2 cm to 95% of hernias >10 cm. The most common mesh type was synthetic non-absorbable (46%), followed by synthetic absorbable mesh (37%). The incidence of complications was significantly associated with hernia width. CONCLUSIONS: A population-level, hernia-specific database captured operative details for 919 patients in 1 year. There was significant variation in mesh use and outcomes based on hernia size. These nuanced data may inform higher quality clinical practice.