A novel computerized approach to scoping reviews using Synthesis software: the first 15 years of The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

Scoping reviews of innovations in health care characterized by large numbers and types of publications present a unique challenge. A novel software application, Synthesis, can efficiently scan the literature to map the evidence and inform practice. We applied Synthesis to the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), a high-quality database designed to measure risk-adjusted 30-day surgical outcomes for national and international benchmarking. The scoping review describes the breadth of studies in the NSQIP literature. We performed a comprehensive electronic literature search using PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge and Scopus to capture all NSQIP articles published between Jan. 1, 2000, and Dec. 31, 2020. Two reviewers independently reviewed articles to determine their relevance using predefined inclusion criteria. We imported references into Synthesis to semiautomate data management. Extracted data included surgical specialty, study type and year of publication. Of the 4661 NSQIP articles included, 3631 (77.9%) were published within the last 5 years. Among NSQIP-related articles, the most common study types were based on outcomes (46.7%) and association (41.7%), and the most common surgical specialties were general surgery and orthopedic surgery, representing 35.7% and 24.0% of the articles, respectively. Synthesis enabled a rapid review of thousands of NSQIP publications. The scoping review provided an overview of the articles in the NSQIP literature and suggested that the NSQIP is increasingly being described in publications of quality and safety in surgery.

Complications of appendectomy and cholecystectomy in acute care surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Acute care surgery (ACS) was initiated two decades ago to address timeliness and quality in emergency general surgery. We hypothesized that ACS has improved the management of acute appendicitis and biliary disease. METHODS: A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of outcome studies for emergent appendectomy and cholecystectomy from 1966 to 2017, comparing studies prior to and following ACS implementation, were performed. RESULTS: Of 1,704 studies, 27 were selected for analysis (appendicitis, 16; biliary pathology, 7; both, 4). Following ACS introduction, the complication rate was significantly reduced in both appendectomy and cholecystectomy (risk ratios, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57-0.85; I = 9.2% and relative risk, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.41-0.94; I = 63.5%) respectively. There was a significant reduction in the time from arrival in emergency until admission and from admission to operation (-1.37 hours: 95% CI, -1.93 to -0.80; -2.51 hours: 95% CI, -4.44 to -0.58) in the appendectomy cohort. Time to operation was shorter in the cholecystectomy group (-6.46 hours; 95% CI, -9.54 to -3.4). Length of hospital stay was reduced in both groups (appendectomy, -0.9 day; cholecystectomy, -1.09 day). There was a reduction in overall cost in cholecystectomy group (-US $854.37; 95% CI, -1,554.1 to -154.05). No statistical significance was detected for wound infection, abscess, conversion of laparoscopy to open technique, rate of negative appendectomy, after hours, readmission, and cost. CONCLUSION: The implementation of ACS models in general surgery emergency care has significantly improved system and patient outcomes for appendicitis and biliary pathology. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Systematic review and meta-analysis of a retrospective study, level III.

Preoperative skin antiseptics for preventing surgical site infections: what to do?

BACKGROUND: Safe and effective patient preoperative skin antisepsis is recommended to prevent surgical site infections (SSIs), reduce patient morbidity, and reduce systemic costs. However, there is lack of consensus among best practice recommendations regarding the optimal skin antiseptic solution and method of application. METHODS: In 2010 and 2011 the health technology appraisal committee of the Surgery Operational Clinical Network (SOCN), of Alberta Health Services (AHS), conducted an environmental scan to determine the current preoperative skin antisepsis in Alberta, reviewed key publications and existing guidelines, and requested a systematic review from the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH). Using this information, and an established protocol for evidence-informed recommendations, the health technology appraisal committee made recommendations that were, in 2012, reviewed and endorsed by the SOCN executive and the AHS-Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) group. RESULTS: The environmental scan revealed practice variation in the types of antiseptic solutions and application methods being used in the 18 Alberta hospitals surveyed. The systematic review suggested that preoperative antiseptic showering reduces skin flora but the effect on SSI rates was inconclusive. While the review found no conclusive evidence to recommend an optimal antiseptic solution or application method, the results of two large randomized controlled trials suggest that chlorhexidine in 70% alcohol is more effective than povidone iodine in the prevention of SSIs. These results and the recommendations from Safer Healthcare Now!, a program of the Canadian Patient Safety Institute (CPSI), were used to inform the recommendations for AHS. These recommendations included abandoning preoperative showering with antiseptics except for special cases (high-risk surgeries such as sternotomies and implants as recommended by IPC) and standardizing skin antiseptic application methods and solution to chlorhexidine (CHG) in 70% alcohol. The exception would be procedures involving the ear, eye, mouth, mucous membranes, neural tissue, infants and emergent trauma cases where povidine iodine should be used. CONCLUSION: Using the best available evidence it was recommended that AHS standardize surgical skin antisepsis to 2% CHG in 70% alcohol as the preferred antiseptic and povidone iodine, as an alternative when CHG is contraindicated, to reduce SSIs, practice variation, and health care costs. Further research is required to determine the optimal skin antiseptic solution to reduce SSIs.

Introduction of new technologies and decision making processes: a framework to adapt a Local Health Technology Decision Support Program for other local settings.

PURPOSE: Introducing new health technologies, including medical devices, into a local setting in a safe, effective, and transparent manner is a complex process, involving many disciplines and players within an organization. Decision making should be systematic, consistent, and transparent. It should involve translating and integrating scientific evidence, such as health technology assessment (HTA) reports, with context-sensitive evidence to develop recommendations on whether and under what conditions a new technology will be introduced. However, the development of a program to support such decision making can require considerable time and resources. An alternative is to adapt a preexisting program to the new setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We describe a framework for adapting the Local HTA Decision Support Program, originally developed by the Department of Surgery and Surgical Services (Calgary, AB, Canada), for use by other departments. The framework consists of six steps: 1) development of a program review and adaptation manual, 2) education and readiness assessment of interested departments, 3) evaluation of the program by individual departments, 4) joint evaluation via retreats, 5) synthesis of feedback and program revision, and 6) evaluation of the adaptation process. RESULTS: Nine departments revised the Local HTA Decision Support Program and expressed strong satisfaction with the adaptation process. Key elements for success were identified. CONCLUSION: Adaptation of a preexisting program may reduce duplication of effort, save resources, raise the health care providers' awareness of HTA, and foster constructive stakeholder engagement, which enhances the legitimacy of evidence-informed recommendations for introducing new health technologies. We encourage others to use this framework for program adaptation and to report their experiences.

Multi-criteria development and incorporation into decision tools for health technology adoption.

PURPOSE: When introducing new health technologies, decision makers must integrate research evidence with local operational management information to guide decisions about whether and under what conditions the technology will be used. Multi-criteria decision analysis can support the adoption or prioritization of health interventions by using criteria to explicitly articulate the health organization's needs, limitations, and values in addition to evaluating evidence for safety and effectiveness. This paper seeks to describe the development of a framework to create agreed-upon criteria and decision tools to enhance a pre-existing local health technology assessment (HTA) decision support program. DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: The authors compiled a list of published criteria from the literature, consulted with experts to refine the criteria list, and used a modified Delphi process with a group of key stakeholders to review, modify, and validate each criterion. In a workshop setting, the criteria were used to create decision tools. FINDINGS: A set of user-validated criteria for new health technology evaluation and adoption was developed and integrated into the local HTA decision support program. Technology evaluation and decision guideline tools were created using these criteria to ensure that the decision process is systematic, consistent, and transparent. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: This framework can be used by others to develop decision-making criteria and tools to enhance similar technology adoption programs. ORIGINALITY/VALUE: The development of clear, user-validated criteria for evaluating new technologies adds a critical element to improve decision-making on technology adoption, and the decision tools ensure consistency, transparency, and real-world relevance.

New technologies and surgical innovation: five years of a local health technology assessment program in a surgical department.

There is pressure for surgical departments to introduce new and innovative health technologies in an evidence-based manner while ensuring that they are safe and effective and can be managed with available resources. A local health technology assessment (HTA) program was developed to systematically integrate research evidence with local operational management information and to make recommendations for subsequent decision by the departmental executive committee about whether and under what conditions the technology will be used. The authors present a retrospective analysis of the outcomes of this program as used by the Department of Surgery & Surgical Services in the Calgary Health Region over a 5-year period from December 2005 to December 2010. Of the 68 technologies requested, 15 applications were incomplete and dropped, 12 were approved, 3 were approved for a single case on an urgent/emergent basis, 21 were approved for "clinical audit" for a restricted number of cases with outcomes review, 14 were approved for research use only, and 3 were referred to additional review bodies. Subsequent outcome reports resulted in at least 5 technologies being dropped for failure to perform. Decisions based on local HTA program recommendations were rarely "yes" or "no." Rather, many technologies were given restricted approval with full approval contingent on satisfying certain conditions such as clinical outcomes review, training protocol development, or funding. Thus, innovation could be supported while ensuring safety and effectiveness. This local HTA program can be adapted to a variety of settings and can help bridge the gap between evidence and practice.