Surgeon Gender and Performance Outcomes for Hysterectomies: Retrospective Cohort Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether there are differences in several performance metrics between male and female surgeons for hysterectomies. DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. We matched surgeries performed by female surgeons to those by male surgeons using a propensity score and compared outcomes by gender after adjusting for years in practice and fellowship training. SETTING: A total of 6 hospitals (3 academic, 3 community) in Ontario, Canada, between July 2016 and December 2019. PATIENTS: All consecutive patients. INTERVENTIONS: Hysterectomy. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Primary outcome was a composite of any complication or return to emergency room (ER) within 30 days. Secondary outcomes were grade II or greater complications, return to ER, and operative time. We included 2664 hysterectomies performed by 77 surgeons. After propensity matching, 963 surgeries performed by females were compared with 963 performed by males. There were no differences in the primary (relative risk [RR], 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71-1.20; p = .56) or secondary outcomes of grade II or greater complication (RR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.71-1.45; p = .96) or return to ER (RR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.55-1.20; p = .30). However, surgeries performed by males were 24.72 minutes shorter (95% CI, 18.09-31.34 minutes; p <.001). Entire cohort post hoc regression analysis confirmed these findings. E-value analysis indicated that it is unlikely for an unmeasured confounder to undo the observed difference. CONCLUSION: Although complication and readmission rates are similar, male surgeons may have a shorter operating time than female surgeons for hysterectomies, which may have implications for health systems and inequalities in surgeon renumeration.

Individualized Assessment of Risk of Complications after Benign Hysterectomy.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study is to identify patient characteristics associated with postoperative complications or readmissions after hysterectomy for a benign indication. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SETTING: The Surgical Gynecologic Scorecard Database includes performance metrics and patient outcomes for hysterectomies across 7 sites in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals who underwent hysterectomy for benign gynecologic indication and were recorded in the Surgical Gynecologic Scorecard Database between July 2016 and June 2019 were included in this study. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Two outcomes of interest were considered: (1) complications grade II or greater on the Clavien-Dindo classification scale and (2) emergency room visits or hospital readmissions within 6 weeks after operation. Logistic models were generated to determine the associations between outcome of interest and potential predictors using a mixed-step AIC selection algorithm. A total of 2792 patients underwent hysterectomy for a benign indication during the study period, with a mean age of 52.6 ± 11.7 years and mean body mass index of 29.0 ± 0.7 kg/m2. The most common indications for surgery were abnormal uterine bleeding (33.3%) and myomas (33.6%). Previous cesarean delivery (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.42), American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥3 (aOR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.42-3.99), preoperative anemia (aOR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.12-2.02), and laparotomic approach (aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.30-2.29) were associated with increased odds of complication. Perioperative complications (aOR, 2.95; 95% CI, 2.12-4.08), preoperative anemia (aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.03-1.98), and vaginal (aOR, 1.94; 95% CI, 1.26-2.96) or laparotomic (aOR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.10-2.43) approach were associated with increased odds of emergency room visit or readmission to hospital. CONCLUSION: This study identified several important risk factors for complications after hysterectomy. The utility of these data is important to help improve counseling for patients undergoing a hysterectomy and potentially optimize modifiable risk factors when identified preoperatively.

A Protocol for a Pan-Canadian Prospective Observational Study on Active Surveillance or Surgery for Very Low Risk Papillary Thyroid Cancer.

Background: The traditional management of papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) is thyroidectomy (total or partial removal of the thyroid). Active surveillance (AS) may be considered as an alternative option for small, low risk PTC. AS involves close follow-up (including regularly scheduled clinical and radiological assessments), with the intention of intervening with surgery for disease progression or patient preference. Methods: This is a protocol for a prospective, observational, long-term follow-up multi-centre Canadian cohort study. Consenting eligible adults with small, low risk PTC (< 2cm in maximal diameter, confined to the thyroid, and not immediately adjacent to critical structures in the neck) are offered the choice of AS or surgery for management of PTC. Patient participants are free to choose either option (AS or surgery) and the disease management course is thus not assigned by the investigators. Surgery is provided as usual care by a surgeon in an institution of the patient's choice. Our primary objective is to determine the rate of 'failure' of disease management in respective AS and surgical arms as defined by: i) AS arm - surgery for progression of PTC, and ii) surgical arm - surgery or other treatment for disease persistence or progression after completing initial treatment. Secondary outcomes include long-term thyroid oncologic and treatment outcomes, as well as patient-reported outcomes. Discussion: The results from this study will provide long-term clinical and patient reported outcome evidence regarding active surveillance or immediate surgery for management of small, low risk PTC. This will inform future clinical trials in disease management of small, low risk papillary thyroid cancer. Registration details: This prospective observational cohort study is registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04624477), but it should not be considered a clinical trial as there is no assigned intervention and patients are free to choose either AS or surgery.

Impact of Minimally Invasive Gynaecology Fellowship Training on Quality Performance Metrics for Hysterectomy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in quality metrics between hysterectomies performed by fellowship-trained surgeons and those performed by generalists. METHODS: Retrospective review of 2845 consecutive hysterectomies by 75 surgeons (23 fellowship-trained, 52 generalists) at 7 hospitals in Ontario, Canada. The primary outcome was a composite of any complication or return to the emergency department (ED) within 30 days of hysterectomy. Secondary outcomes were 2 quality outcome measures (grade of complication and return to ED within 30 days) and 4 quality process measures (minimally invasive hysterectomy rate, rate of preoperative anemia, same-day discharge for laparoscopic hysterectomy [LH], and performing cystoscopy at LH). RESULTS: Fellowship-trained surgeons were more likely to perform concurrent resection of endometriosis, bilateral ureterolysis, lysis of adhesions, uterine/internal iliac artery ligation, and morcellation (all P < 0.001). Generalists performed more vaginal procedures, including vaginal repair, vault suspension, and insertion of mid-urethral sling (all P < 0.001). After controlling for patient and surgical factors, there was no difference in the primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.07; 95% CI 0.79-1.45, P = 0.667). Fellowship-trained surgeons were more likely to perform minimally invasive hysterectomy (aOR 2.38; 95% CI 1.15-4.93, P = 0.020), had higher rates of same-day discharge for LH (aOR 2.23; 95% CI 1.31-3.81, P = 0.003), and were more likely to perform cystoscopy (unadjusted OR 2.94; 95% CI 2.30-3.85, P < 0.001). There were no differences in the rates of preoperative anemia, surgical complications, and ED visits. CONCLUSION: Differences exist between fellowship-trained surgeons and generalists regarding case mix and process quality metrics. Postoperative complications and readmissions were comparable for both groups of surgeons.

Investigating Molecular Signatures Underlying Trapeziometacarpal Osteoarthritis Through the Evaluation of Systemic Cytokine Expression.

Purpose: Non-operative management of trapeziometacarpal osteoarthritis (TMOA) demonstrates only short-term symptomatic alleviation, and no approved disease modifying drugs exist to treat this condition. A key issue in these patients is that radiographic disease severity can be discordant with patient reported pain, illustrating the need to identify molecular mediators of disease. This study characterizes the biochemical profile of TMOA patients to elucidate molecular mechanisms driving TMOA progression. Methods: Plasma from patients with symptomatic TMOA undergoing surgical (n=39) or non-surgical management (n=44) with 1-year post-surgical follow-up were compared using a targeted panel of 27 cytokines. Radiographic (Eaton-Littler), anthropometric, longitudinal pain (VAS, TASD, quick DASH) and functional (key pinch, grip strength) data were used to evaluate relationships between structure, pain, and systemic cytokine expression. Principal Component Analysis was used to identify clusters of patients. Results: Patients undergoing surgery had greater BMI as well as higher baseline quick DASH, TASD scores. Systemically, these patients could only be distinguished by differing levels of Interleukin-7 (IL-7), with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.22 for surgery for those with increased levels of this cytokine. Interestingly, PCA analysis of all patients (regardless of surgical status) identified a subset of patients with an "inflammatory" phenotype, as defined by a unique molecular signature consisting of thirteen cytokines. Conclusion: Overall, this study demonstrated that circulating cytokines are capable of distinguishing TMOA disease severity, and identified IL-7 as a target capable of differentiating disease severity with higher levels associated with a decreased likelihood of TMOA needing surgical intervention. It also identified a cluster of patients who segregate based on a molecular signature of select cytokines.

Dienogest and the Risk of Endometriosis Recurrence Following Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine whether dienogest therapy after endometriosis surgery reduces the risk of endometriosis recurrence compared with expectant management. DATA SOURCES: Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, LILACS, clinicaltrials.gov, and International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Registry were searched from inception to March 2019 for observational and randomized controlled trials. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Medical Subject Heading terms and keywords such as "dienogest," "endometriosis," and "recurrence" were used to identify relevant studies. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: The search yielded 328 studies, 10 of which were eligible for inclusion, representing 1184 patients treated with dienogest and 846 expectantly managed controls. Among these studies, 9 looked exclusively at endometrioma recurrence, whereas 1 used reappearance of symptoms as evidence of disease recurrence. Data on both incidence of and time to recurrence of endometriosis were extracted. The incidence rate of endometriosis recurrence in patients treated with dienogest was 2 per 100 women over a mean follow-up of 29 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-3.11) versus 29 per 100 women managed expectantly over a mean follow-up of 36 months (95% CI, 25.66-31.74). The likelihood of recurrence was significantly reduced with postoperative dienogest (log odds -1.96, CI, -2.53 to -1.38, p <.001). CONCLUSION: Patients receiving dienogest after conservative surgery for endometriosis had significantly lower risk of postoperative disease recurrence than those who were expectantly managed.

The Characteristics of Physicians Who are Re-Disciplined by Medical Boards: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Physician misconduct adversely affects patient safety and is therefore of societal importance. Little work has specifically examined re-disciplined physicians. A study was conducted to compare the characteristics of re-disciplined to first-time disciplined physicians. METHODS: A retrospective review of Canadian physicians disciplined by medical boards between 2000 and 2015 was conducted. Physicians were divided into those disciplined once and those disciplined more than once. Differences in demographics, transgressions, and penalties were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 938 disciplinary events for 810 disciplined physicians with 1 in 8 (n = 101, 12.5%) being re-disciplined. Re-disciplined physicians had up to six disciplinary events in the study period and 4 (4.0%) had events in more than one jurisdiction. Among those re-disciplined, 94 (93.1%) were male, 34 (33.7%) were international medical graduates, and 88 (87.1%) practiced family medicine (n = 59, 58.4%), psychiatry (n = 11, 10.9%), surgery (n = 9, 8.9%), or obstetrics/gynecology (n = 9, 8.9%). The proportion of obstetrician/gynecologists was higher among re-disciplined physicians (8.9% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.048). Re-disciplined physicians had more mental illness (1.7% vs. 0.1%, p = 0.01), unlicensed activity (19.2% vs. 7.2%, p <0.01), and less sexual misconduct (20.1% vs. 27.9%, p = 0.02). License suspension occurred more frequently among those re-disciplined (56.8% vs. 48.0%, p = 0.02) as did license restriction (38.4% vs. 26.7%, p <0.01). License revocation was not different between cohorts (10.9% vs. 13.5%, p = 0.36). CONCLUSION: Re-discipline is not uncommon and underscores the need for better identification of at-risk individuals and optimization of remediation and penalties. The distribution of transgression argues for a national disciplinary database that could improve communication between jurisdictional medical boards.

Payments by US pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to US medical journal editors: retrospective observational study.

Objective To estimate financial payments from industry to US journal editors.Design Retrospective observational study.Setting 52 influential (high impact factor for their specialty) US medical journals from 26 specialties and US Open Payments database, 2014.Participants 713 editors at the associate level and above identified from each journal's online masthead.Main outcome measures All general payments (eg, personal income) and research related payments from pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers to eligible physicians in 2014. Percentages of editors receiving payments and the magnitude of such payments were compared across journals and by specialty. Journal websites were also reviewed to determine if conflict of interest policies for editors were readily accessible.Results Of 713 eligible editors, 361 (50.6%) received some (>$0) general payments in 2014, and 139 (19.5%) received research payments. The median general payment was $11 (£8; €9) (interquartile range $0-2923) and the median research payment was $0 ($0-0). The mean general payment was $28 136 (SD $415 045), and the mean research payment was $37 963 (SD $175 239). The highest median general payments were received by journal editors from endocrinology ($7207, $0-85 816), cardiology ($2664, $0-12 912), gastroenterology ($696, $0-20 002), rheumatology ($515, $0-14 280), and urology ($480, $90-669). For high impact general medicine journals, median payments were $0 ($0-14). A review of the 52 journal websites revealed that editor conflict of interest policies were readily accessible (ie, within five minutes) for 17/52 (32.7%) of journals.Conclusions Industry payments to journal editors are common and often large, particularly for certain subspecialties. Journals should consider the potential impact of such payments on public trust in published research.

The Characteristics of International Medical Graduates Who Have Been Disciplined by Professional Regulatory Colleges in Canada: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the proportion and characteristics of international medical graduates (IMGs) who have been disciplined by professional regulatory colleges in Canada in comparison with disciplined North American medical graduates (NAMGs). METHOD: The authors compiled a database of the nature of professional misconduct and penalties incurred by disciplined physicians from January 2000 to May 2015 using public records. They compared discipline data for IMGs versus those for NAMGs, and calculated risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for select outcomes. RESULTS: There were 794 physicians disciplined; 922 disciplinary cases during the 15-year study period. IMGs composed an average of 23.4% (standard deviation = 1.1%) of the total physician population and represented one-third of disciplined physicians and discipline cases. The overall disciplinary rate for all Canadian physicians was 8.52 cases per 10,000 physician years (95% CI [7.77, 9.31]). This rate per group was higher for IMGs than for NAMGs (12.91 [95% CI (11.50, 14.43)] vs. 8.16 [95% CI (7.53, 8.82)] cases per 10,000 physician years, P < .01, and RR 1.58 (95% CI [1.38, 1.82]). IMGs were disciplined at significantly higher rates than NAMGs if they were trained in South Africa (RR 1.73 [95% CI (1.14, 2.51), P < .01), Egypt (RR 3.59 [95% CI (2.18, 5.52)], P < .01), or India (RR 1.66 [95% CI (1.01, 2.55)], P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: IMGs are disciplined at a higher rate than NAMGs. Future initiatives should be focused to delineate the exact cause of this observation.

Patient Preferences for Test Result Notification.

IMPORTANCE: Patients are increasingly being given access to their test results, but little is known about how preferences vary with the test under consideration or the results of the test (normal or abnormal). OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to examine preferences for test result communication. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We surveyed adults to explore their preferences for test result notification for three common diagnostic tests of varying "emotional impact" (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry [DXA], genital herpes, and cancer biopsy) when test results were 1) normal and 2) abnormal. We conducted our survey between June and August 2012 on the campus of an academic medical center. For each scenario, subjects were asked to rank seven methods that might be used to communicate test results (letter, unsecured email, secured email, text message, telephone call, secure Web portal, office visit) in order of acceptability. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main measures were the percentage of respondents who ranked a particular test result notification method favorably and the percentage who ranked it as unacceptable. RESULTS: When test results were normal, subjects' notification preferences were generally similar for DXA, herpes and cancer biopsy, with telephone and letter ranked most favorably for all three tests. Conversely, text message and unsecured email were viewed as unacceptable notification methods for normal results by 45.0-55.0 % of subjects across all three tests. When test results were abnormal, office visits became more popular. A higher proportion of subjects ranked office visits as their most preferred notification method for our test with high "emotional impact" (cancer biopsy) (38.4 %) as compared to DXA (28.2 %) and herpes (27.9 %) (P = 0.02). For most test scenarios, younger subjects appeared to rank electronic communication modalities (secure email or Web portal) higher than older subjects, though this difference did not reach statistical significance (P = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Preferences for test result notification can differ substantially depending upon the test under consideration and results of the test. Providers and health care systems should consider these factors when deciding how to communicate results to patients.