Current use of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program surgical risk calculator in academic surgery: a mixed-methods study.

Background: This study aims to quantitatively assess use of the NSQIP surgical risk calculator (NSRC) in contemporary surgical practice and to identify barriers to use and potential interventions that might increase use. Materials and methods: We performed a cross-sectional study of surgeons at seven institutions. The primary outcomes were self-reported application of the calculator in general clinical practice and specific clinical scenarios as well as reported barriers to use. Results: In our sample of 99 surgeons (49.7% response rate), 73.7% reported use of the NSRC in the past month. Approximately half (51.9%) of respondents reported infrequent NSRC use (<20% of preoperative discussions), while 14.3% used it in ≥40% of preoperative assessments. Reported use was higher in nonelective cases (30.2% vs 11.1%) and in patients who were ≥65 years old (37.1% vs 13.0%), functionally dependent (41.2% vs 6.6%), or with surrogate consent (39.9% vs 20.4%). NSRC use was not associated with training status or years in practice. Respondents identified a lack of influence on the decision to pursue surgery as well as concerns regarding the calculator's accuracy as barriers to use. Surgeons suggested improving integration to workflow and better education as strategies to increase NSRC use. Conclusions: Many surgeons reported use of the NSRC, but few used it frequently. Surgeons reported more frequent use in nonelective cases and frail patients, suggesting the calculator is of greater utility for high-risk patients. Surgeons raised concerns about perceived accuracy and suggested additional education as well as integration of the calculator into the electronic health record.

Multisite Implementation of an American College of Surgeons Geriatric Surgery Quality Improvement Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons (ACS) Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery (CQGS) identified standards of surgical care for the growing, vulnerable population of aging adults in the US. The aims of this study were to determine implementation feasibility for 30 selected standards, identify barriers and best practices in their implementation, and further refine these geriatric standards and verification process. STUDY DESIGN: The CQGS requested participation from hospitals involved in the ACS NSQIP Geriatric Surgery Pilot Project, previous CQGS feasibility analyses, and hospitals affiliated with a core development team member. Thirty standards were selected for implementation. After implementation, site visits were conducted, and postvisit surveys were distributed. RESULTS: Eight hospitals were chosen to participate. Program management (55%), immediate preoperative and intraoperative clinical care (62.5%), and postoperative clinical care (58%) had the highest mean percentage of "fully compliant" standards. Goals and decision-making (30%), preoperative optimization (28%), and transitions of care (12.5%) had the lowest mean percentage of fully compliant standards. Best practices and barriers to implementation were identified across 13 of the 30 standards. More than 80% of the institutions reported that participation changed the surgical care provided for older adults. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents the first national implementation assessment undertaken by the ACS for one of its quality programs. The CQGS pilot testing was able to demonstrate implementation feasibility for 30 standards, identify challenges and best practices, and further inform dissemination of the ACS Geriatric Surgery Verification Program.

Shared Decision Making in the Geriatric Surgery Verification Program: Assessing Baseline Performance.

CONTEXT: As part of the launch of the Geriatric Surgery Verification program in 2019, the American College of Surgeons issued care standards for older patients, including requirements for preoperative documentation of patients' goals. Hospital performance on these standards prior to the Geriatric Surgery Verification program is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess baseline performance of the Geriatric Surgery Verification (GSV) standard for documentation of preoperative goals for older patients, and to determine factors associated with standard adherence. METHODS: Using natural language processing, this study examines the electronic health records of patients aged 65 years or older who underwent coronary artery bypass grafts (CABG) or colectomies in 2017 or 2018 at three hospitals. The primary outcome was adherence to at least one of the three components of GSV Standard 5.1, which requires preoperative documentation of overall health goals, treatment goals, and patient-centered outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 2630 operations and 2563 patients were included. At least one component of the standard was met in 307 (11.7%) operations and all three components were met in 5 (0.2%). Higher likelihood of meeting the standard was demonstrated for patients who were female (odds ratio [OR] 1.30; 95% CI 1.00-1.68), undergoing colectomy (OR 2.82; 95% CI 2.15-3.72), or with more comorbidities (Charlson scores >3 [OR 1.55; 95% CI 1.14-2.09]). CONCLUSION: Before GSV program implementation, clinicians for two major operations almost never met the GSV standard for preoperative discussion of patient goals. Interdisciplinary teams will need to adjust clinical practice to meet best-practice communication standards for older patients.

Frailty in emergency general surgery: Low-risk procedures pose similar risk as high-risk procedures for frail patients.

BACKGROUND: The association of frailty on postoperative outcomes after elective and emergency general surgery procedures has been widely studied. However, this association has not been examined in the geriatric population stratified by emergency general surgery procedural risk. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed using the 2012 to 2017 American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. We identified geriatric patients (age ≥65 years) undergoing an emergency general surgery procedure within 48 hours of admission stratified by the procedural risk. Frailty was accessed using Modified 5-item Frailty Index, and the patients were divided into 4 groups Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 0, 1, 2, and ≥3. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the impact of increasing Modified 5-item Frailty Index score on postoperative complications, failure-to-rescue, and readmissions. RESULTS: In the study, 16,911 low risk procedure emergency general surgery patients were grouped as (33.3%) Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 0, (45.1%) Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 1, (18.7%) Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 2, and (2.9%) Modified 5-item Frailty Index ≥3 respectively. After multivariable analyses, increasing Modified 5-item Frailty Index score (versus Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 0) was associated with complications (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]; Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 2: 2.1 [1.3-3.5], Modified 5-item Frailty Index ≥ 3: 2.2 [1.2-4.2]), failure-to-rescue (Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 2: 2.3 [1.3-4.0], Modified 5-item Frailty Index ≥ 3: 2.3 [1.2-4.6]), readmission (Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 2: 1.4 [1.2-1.7], Modified 5-item Frailty Index ≥ 3: 1.5 [1.1-2.1]). In addition, 30,305 high-risk patients undergoing procedure emergency general surgery were grouped as (24.1%) Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 0, (44.9%) Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 1, (24.0%) Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 2, and (7.0%) Modified 5-item Frailty Index ≥3, respectively. After multivariable analyses, increasing Modified 5-item Frailty Index score (versus Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 0) was associated with complications (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]; Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 2: 1.2 [1.2-1.3], Modified 5-item Frailty Index ≥3: 1.7 [1.5-2.0]), failure-to-rescue (Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 2: 1.3 [1.2-1.5], Modified 5-item Frailty Index ≥3: 1.5 [1.3-1.7]), readmission (Modified 5-item Frailty Index = 2: 1.3 [1.2-1.4], Modified 5-item Frailty Index ≥3: 1.6 [1.4-1.9]). CONCLUSION: Increasing levels of frailty in geriatric emergency general surgery patients are associated with higher levels of postoperative complications, failure-to-rescue, and readmission. Clinicians should consider frailty in assessing the risk of even low-risk surgeries in this population.

Surrogate consent for surgery among older adult patients.

BACKGROUND: Surrogate consent for surgery is sought when a patient lacks capacity to consent for their own operation. The purpose of this study is to describe older adults who underwent surgical interventions with surrogate consent. METHODS: A descriptive analysis was performed using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Geriatric Surgery Pilot collected from 2014 to 2018. All patients included were ≥65 years old and underwent a surgical procedure. Demographic and preoperative health characteristics were evaluated to examine differences between those with and without surrogate consent. RESULTS: In total, 51,618 patients were included in this study, and 6.6% underwent an operation with surrogate consent. Surrogate consent was more common among older patients (median age 83 vs 73, P < .001), female patients (7.7% vs 5.3%, P < .001), patients undergoing emergency as opposed to elective procedures (21.9% vs 1.6%, P < .001), patients with cognitive impairment (50.5% vs 2.4%, P < .001), and patients who were dependent on others for activities of daily living (41.9% vs 4.1%, P < .001). Nearly half of patients with a diagnosis of cognitive impairment signed their own consent. CONCLUSION: Surrogate consent was more common among patients who were older, female, had a higher comorbidity burden, and had preoperative disability. Nearly half of patients with documented cognitive impairment signed their own consent. These results indicate that further research is needed to understand how surgeons determine which patients require surrogate consent.

Understanding the role of informal caregivers in postoperative care transitions for older patients.

BACKGROUND: Older adults may have new care needs and functional limitations after surgery. Many rely on informal caregivers (unpaid family or friends) after discharge but the extent of informal support is unknown. We sought to examine the role of informal postoperative caregiving on transitions of care for older adults undergoing routine surgical procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using ACS NSQIP Geriatric Pilot Project data, 2014-2018. Patients were ≥65 years and underwent an inpatient surgical procedure. Patients who lived at home alone were compared with those who lived with support from informal caregivers (family and/or friends). Primary outcomes were discharge destination (home vs. post-acute care) and readmission within 30 days. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the association between support at home, discharge destination, and readmission. RESULTS: Of 18,494 patients, 25% lived alone before surgery. There was no difference in loss of independence (decline in functional status or new use of mobility aid) after surgery between patients who lived alone or with others (18.7% vs. 19.5%, p = 0.24). Nevertheless, twice as many patients who lived alone were discharged to a non-home location (10.2% vs. 5.1%; OR: 2.24, CI: 1.93-2.56). Patients who lived alone and were discharged home with new informal caregivers had increased odds of readmission (OR: 1.43, CI: 1.09-1.86). CONCLUSION: Living alone independently predicts discharge to post-acute care, and patients who received new informal caregiver support at home have higher odds of readmission. These findings highlight opportunities to improve discharge planning and care.

Perioperative Pain Management Issues Unique to Older Adults Undergoing Surgery: A Narrative Review.

INTRODUCTION: The older population is growing and with this growth there is a parallel rise in the operations performed on this vulnerable group. The perioperative pain management strategy for older adults is unique and requires a team-based approach for provision of high-quality surgical care. METHODS: Literature search was performed using PubMed in addition to review of relevant protocols and guidelines from geriatric, surgical, and anesthesia societies. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses, randomized trials, observational studies, and society guidelines were summarized in this review. MANAGEMENT: The optimal approach to a pain management strategy for older adults undergoing surgery involves addressing all phases of perioperative care. For example, preoperative assessment of a patient's cognitive function and presence of chronic pain may impact the pain management plan. Consideration should be also given to intraoperative strategies to improve pain control and minimize both the dose and side effects from opioids (e.g. regional anesthetic techniques). Postoperative pain control (e.g. under or over treatment of pain) may impact the development of elderly-specific complications such as postoperative delirium and functional decline. Finally, pain management does not stop after the older adult patient leaves the hospital. Both discharge planning and post-operative clinic follow-up provide important opportunities for collaboration and intervention. CONCLUSIONS: An opioid-sparing pain management strategy for older adults can be accomplished with a comprehensive and collaborative interdisciplinary strategy addressing all phases of perioperative care.

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.

Evaluation of Postoperative Functional Health Status Decline Among Older Adults.

Importance: Functional outcomes have value for older adults who undergo surgical procedures. Preventing postoperative functional decline in this patient population necessitates the identification of the factors associated with this outcome and minimizing their implications. Objectives: To assess the prevalence of functional decline 30 days after a surgical procedure among older adults 80 years or older, examine the risk factors of this decline, and identify ways to minimize this decline by addressing its mutable factors. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective cohort study used patient data from the Geriatric Surgery Pilot Project, a multi-institutional data registry of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Inclusion criteria were patients 80 years or older who underwent a surgical procedure that required an inpatient stay at 1 of 23 hospitals enrolled in the Geriatric Surgery Pilot Project from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2018, and had preoperative and postoperative functional health status data. Data analysis was performed from January 7, 2019, to December 2, 2019. Exposures: Adults 80 years or older who underwent an inpatient surgical procedure. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative functional decline defined by a change in functional health status from admission or before the surgical procedure (ie, from independent to partially or totally dependent, or from partially dependent to totally dependent). Functional health status was measured by a patient's ability to perform activities of daily living. Secondary outcomes were hospital readmission and 30-day postoperative living location. Results: Of the 2013 patients analyzed in this study, 1128 were women (56.0%) and the mean (SD) age was 84.9 (3.9) years. Functional decline at 30 days after the surgical procedure was present in 406 patients (20.2%). Prevalence of this outcome increased with age, with 337 of 1751 patients aged 80 to 89 years (19.2%) experiencing decline compared with 69 of 262 patients 90 years or older (26.3%). In a risk-adjusted model, the geriatric-specific risk factors statistically significantly associated with this outcome included preoperative mobility aid use (odds ratio [OR] 1.76; 95% CI, 1.39-2.22; P < .001) and malnutrition (OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.04-3.43; P = .04) as well as postoperative delirium (OR, 2.20; 95% CI, 1.60-3.02; P < .001), pressure ulcer (OR, 1.83; 95% CI, 1.02-3.30; P = .04), and mobility aid at discharge (OR, 2.49; 95% CI, 1.72-3.59; P < .001). Among patients with a 30-day functional decline, 106 (26.1%) required hospital readmission and only 219 (53.9%) were living at home compared with 388 patients (95.6%) living at home before the procedure. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, 1 in 5 older adults experienced a functional decline that persisted 30 days after a surgical procedure, an outcome that appeared to be associated with several geriatric-specific risk factors. Future trials are needed to evaluate whether the prevention or mitigation of these factors can decrease the rates of postoperative functional decline in this patient population.

Endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in a centenarian.

As the general population ages, there will be an increasing number of vascular patients in their 90s and older. However, geriatric patients have historically been turned down for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair despite high aneurysm-related mortality in the unrepaired. Herein, we describe the perioperative considerations and the successful, uncomplicated operative course of a 100-year-old woman who underwent an elective endovascular aortic aneurysm repair for an expanding 5.3-cm abdominal aortic aneurysm. Given a suitable patient, there is acceptable risk profile of an endovascular approach, even in centenarians.

How We Do It: Creation of a Workforce Development-Focused Track at a Surgical Hackathon.

OBJECTIVE: Healthcare hackathons are fast-paced, mentored events that bring together individuals with diverse skillsets to identify clinical needs and propose solutions. Traditionally geared toward device development and workflow optimization, platforms that address women and minorities in surgery are rare. We aimed to expand the traditional healthcare hackathon model to include a novel workforce development (WD) track to address concerns faced by surgeons and trainees. DESIGN: The WD track was created as part of the first surgical hackathon at our academic institution. In a single-day event, participants identified concerns (pain points) of diversity and sustainability in surgery, formed interdisciplinary teams, and pitched solutions. Pain points, project themes, and postevent survey results were analyzed and compared between WD and other tracks. SETTING: Participants were surveyed at Yale School of Medicine, an academic medical tertiary center, in September 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-one total participants. Twenty-five (80.6%) responded to the survey. RESULTS: Of 57 problem pitches, 23 (40.4%) were related to WD. Issues highlighted 5 themes: training and career exploration, leadership and communication of skills, mental health and burnout prevention, surgeon discrimination and harassment, and work-life balance. Participants formed 6 groups, with 1 focused on WD. There was no difference between participants in the WD track and non-WD track counterparts with regard to excitement for continuing their project beyond the hackathon (4.00, standard deviation [SD] 0.89, vs. 3.63, SD 1.12, p = 0.43), and in their perception of the mentorship they received (4.00, SD 1.00, vs. 4.11, SD 0.78, p = 0.84). The project presented within the WD track, on culturally sensitive scrub wear, was 1 of 3 prize-winners. CONCLUSIONS: The first WD track at a healthcare hackathon identified 5 themes of unmet workforce needs. The pilot demonstrated that WD tracks can be implemented in hackathons with similar results to traditional tracks and create innovative and sustainable solutions to surgical workforce concerns.

The Impact of Frailty on Long-Term Patient-Oriented Outcomes after Emergency General Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVES: Few studies examine the impact of frailty on long-term patient-oriented outcomes after emergency general surgery (EGS). We measured the prevalence of frailty among older EGS patients and examined the impact of frailty on 1-year outcomes. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using 2008 to 2014 Medicare claims. SETTING: Acute care hospitals. PARTICIPANTS: Patients 65 years or older who received one of the five EGS procedures with the highest mortality burden (partial colectomy, small bowel resection, peptic ulcer disease repair, adhesiolysis, or laparotomy). MEASUREMENTS: A validated claims-based frailty index (CFI) identified patients who were not frail (CFI < .15), pre-frail (.15 ≤ CFI < .25), mildly frail (.25 ≤ CFI < .35), and moderately to severely frail (CFI ≥ .35). Multivariable Cox regression compared 1-year mortality. Multivariable Poisson regression compared rates of post-discharge hospital encounters (hospitalizations, intensive care unit stay, emergency department visit) and home time over 1 year after discharge. All regression models adjusted for age, sex, race, admission from facility, procedure, sepsis, inpatient palliative care delivery, trauma center designation, hospital bed size, and teaching status, and they were clustered by patient and hospital referral region. RESULTS: Among 468 459 older EGS adults, 37.4% were pre-frail, 12.4% were mildly frail, and 3.6% were moderately to severely frail. Patients with mild frailty experienced a higher risk of 1-year mortality compared with non-frail patients (hazard ratio = 1.97; confidence interval [CI] = 1.94-2.01). In the year after discharge, patients with mild and moderate to severe frailty had more hospital encounters compared with non-frail patients (7.8 and 11.5 vs 2.0 per person-year; incidence rate ratio [IRR] = 4.01; CI = 3.93-4.08 vs IRR = 5.89; CI = 5.70-6.09, respectively). Patients with mild and moderate to severe frailty also had fewer days at home in the year after discharge compared with non-frail patients (256 and 203 vs 302 mean days; IRR = .97; CI = .96-.97 vs IRR = .95; CI = .94-.95, respectively). CONCLUSION: Older EGS patients with frailty are at increased risk for poor 1-year outcomes and decreased home time. Targeted interventions for older EGS patients with frailty during the index EGS hospitalization are urgently needed to improve long-term outcomes. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1037-1043, 2020.

Enhancing the American College of Surgeons NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator to Predict Geriatric Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator (SRC) plays an important role in risk prediction and decision-making. We sought to enhance the existing ACS NSQIP SRC with functionality to predict geriatric-specific outcomes and assess the predictive value of geriatric-specific risk factors by comparing performance in outcomes prediction using the traditional ACS NSQIP SRC with models that also included geriatric risk factors. STUDY DESIGN: Data were collected from 21 ACS NSQIP Geriatric Surgery Pilot Project hospitals between 2014 and 2017. Hierarchical regression models predicted 4 postoperative geriatric outcomes (ie pressure ulcer, delirium, new mobility aid use, and functional decline) using the traditional 21-variable ACS NSQIP SRC models and 27-variable models that included 6 geriatric risk factors (ie living situation, fall history, mobility aid use, cognitive impairment, surrogate-signed consent, and palliative care on admission). RESULTS: Data from 38,048 patients 65 years or older undergoing 197 unique operations across 10 surgical subspecialties were used. Stable model discrimination and calibration between developmental and validation datasets confirmed predictive validity. Models with and without geriatric risk factors demonstrated excellent performance (C statistic >0.8) with inclusion of geriatric risk factors improving performance. Of the 21 ACS NSQIP variables, CPT code, COPD, age, functional dependence, sex, disseminated cancer, diabetes, and sepsis were the strongest risk predictors, and impaired cognition, fall history, and mobility aid use were the strongest geriatric predictors. CONCLUSIONS: The ACS NSQIP SRC can predict 4 unique outcomes germane to geriatric surgical patients, with improvement of predictive capability after accounting for geriatric risk factors. Augmentation of ACS NSQIP SRC can enhance shared decision-making to improve the quality of surgical care in older adults.

Optimizing the Feasibility and Scalability of a Geriatric Surgery Quality Improvement Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery is a multidisciplinary stakeholder group that aims to systematically improve the surgical care of older adults by establishing a verifiable quality improvement program with standards based on best evidence. Prior work confirmed the validity of a preliminary set of 308 standards to improve the quality of geriatric surgery, but concerns exist as to whether the standards are feasible for hospitals to implement. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to utilize data gained from a multi-institutional survey and interview to improve the scalability and generalizability of a geriatric quality improvement program. METHODS: Using a survey followed by a targeted debrief interview, 15 hospitals gathered an interdisciplinary panel to answer whether each standard was already in place at their institution, and if not, the perceived difficulty of implementation according to a five-point Likert scale (from 1 [very easy] to 5 [very difficult]). The standards were then placed into categories according to the hospital responses. Standards were designated "duplicative" if 11 or more hospitals reported baseline implementation, "prohibitively difficult" if 6 or more hospitals rated the standard as such, and "high potential" if they were neither duplicative nor difficult. A targeted debrief interview was then conducted with each participating hospital. RESULTS: Fifteen participating hospitals evaluated the feasibility of 108 standards and found 28 (26%) duplicative, 35 (32%) too difficult, and 45 (42%) high potential. Of the 108 standards, 49 (45%) were selected for the next iteration of standards, and 59 were removed. Among the standards that were removed, the majority (64%) were rated duplicative and/or difficult. CONCLUSION: A multi-institutional survey and interview successfully identified care standards that were redundant or too difficult to implement on the hospital level. These data will help improve the generalizability and scalability of the program while maintaining the overall goal of improving care. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1074-1078, 2019.

Application of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Methodology to a Large Multidisciplinary Stakeholder Group Evaluating the Validity and Feasibility of Patient-Centered Standards in Geriatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To explore (1) differences in validity and feasibility ratings for geriatric surgical standards across a diverse stakeholder group (surgeons vs. nonsurgeons, health care providers vs. nonproviders, including patient-family, advocacy, and regulatory agencies); (2) whether three multidisciplinary discussion subgroups would reach similar conclusions. DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING: Primary data (ratings) were reported from 58 stakeholder organizations. STUDY DESIGN: An adaptation of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Methodology (RAM) process was conducted in May 2016. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Stakeholders self-administered ratings on paper, returned via mail (Round 1) and in-person (Round 2). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In Round 1, surgeons rated standards more critically (91.2 percent valid; 64.9 percent feasible) than nonsurgeons (100 percent valid; 87.0 percent feasible) but increased ratings in Round 2 (98.7 percent valid; 90.6 percent feasible), aligning with nonsurgeons (99.7 percent valid; 96.1 percent feasible). Three parallel subgroups rated validity at 96.8 percent (group 1), 100 percent (group 2), and 97.4 percent (group 3). Feasibility ratings were 76.9 percent (group 1), 96.1 percent (group 2), and 92.2 percent (group 3). CONCLUSIONS: There are differences in validity and feasibility ratings by health professions, with surgeons rating standards more critically than nonsurgeons. However, three separate discussion subgroups rated a high proportion (96-100 percent) of standards as valid, indicating the RAM can be successfully applied to a large stakeholder group.

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.