Impact of relational coordination on staff and patient outcomes in outpatient surgical clinics.

BACKGROUND: Pressures are increasing for clinicians to provide high-quality, efficient care, leading to increased concerns about staff burnout. PURPOSE: This study asks whether staff well-being can be achieved in ways that are also beneficial for the patient's experience of care. It explores whether relational coordination can contribute to both staff well-being and patient satisfaction in outpatient surgical clinics where time constraints paired with high needs for information transfer increase both the need for and the challenge of achieving timely and accurate communication. METHODOLOGY/APPROACH: We studied relational coordination among surgeons, nurses, residents, administrators, technicians, and secretaries in 11 outpatient surgical clinics. Data were combined from a staff and a patient survey to conduct a cross-sectional study. Data were analyzed using ordinary least squares and random effects regression models. RESULTS: Relational coordination among all workgroups was significantly associated with staff outcomes, including job satisfaction, work engagement, and burnout. Relational coordination was also significantly associated with patients' satisfaction with staff and their overall visit, though the association between relational coordination and patients' satisfaction with their providers did not reach statistical significance. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Even when patient-staff interactions are relatively brief, as in outpatient settings, high levels of relational coordination among interdependent workgroups contribute to positive outcomes for both staff and patients, and low levels tend to have the opposite effect. Clinical leaders can increase the expectation of positive outcomes for both staff and their patients by implementing interventions to strengthen relational coordination.

Autologous Breast Reconstruction in Women Older Than 65 Years Versus Women Younger Than 65 Years: A Multi-Center Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Autologous breast reconstruction has been shown to have fewer complications and superior outcomes. In the elderly patient population, a paucity of literature on the subject may render the surgeon reluctant to recommend or perform such a procedure. The objective of this study was to compare complications and satisfaction after abdominally based breast reconstruction in patients older than versus younger than 65 years. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed with data from 5 North American centers from 2002 to 2012. Patients who underwent autologous reconstruction were identified retrospectively, and chart review was performed. The BREAST-Q questionnaire was sent to these patients via mail. Patient variables, operative outcomes and BREASTQ results were analyzed. The Pearson χ² and analysis of variance tests were used. Given the number of analyses, a more conservative α of 0.01 was used for each comparison. RESULTS: A total of 1809 patients were included with 1751 patients younger than 65 years and 58 patients aged 65 years or older. Analysis of postoperative complications showed no significant differences between the age groups, though there was a trend toward higher seroma development (17.2% vs 8.1%; P = 0.013) and infection (19.0% vs 10.0%; P = 0.028) in the older group with statistical significance set at P less than 0.01 to account for multiple comparisons. A total of 1809 BREAST-Q surveys were sent with a response rate of 52.5%. Patient satisfaction results were equally high between the 2 age groups. CONCLUSIONS: This is the largest study to compare patients undergoing autologous breast reconstruction older than and younger than 65 years within the same cohort. Women older than 65 years represent a minority and constituted only 3% of patients in this multicenter 10-year review. We have shown that with careful patient selection, abdominally based autologous reconstruction should be considered in the elderly patient population because it is well tolerated and achieves high patient satisfaction.

The cost effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix in expander-implant immediate breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Expander-implant breast reconstruction is often supplemented with acellular dermal matrix (ADM). The use of acellular dermal matrix has allowed for faster, less painful expansions and improved aesthetics, but with increased cost. Our goal was to provide the first cost utility analysis of using acellular dermal matrix in two-stage, expander-implant immediate breast reconstruction following mastectomy. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was conducted to identify complication rates for two-stage, expander-implant immediate breast reconstruction with and without acellular dermal matrix. The probabilities of the most common complications were combined with Medicare Current Procedural Terminology reimbursement codes and expert utility estimates to fit into a decision model. The decision model evaluated the cost effectiveness of acellular dermal matrix relative to reconstructions without it. Retail costs for ADM were derived from the LifeCell 2012 company catalogue for Alloderm. RESULTS: The overall complication rates were 30% and 34.5% with and without ADM. The decision model revealed a baseline cost increase of $361.96 when acellular dermal matrix is used. The increase in Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) is 1.37 in the population with acellular dermal matrix. This yields a cost effective incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of $264.20/QALY. Univariate sensitivity analysis confirmed that using acellular dermal matrix is cost effective even when using retail costs for unilateral and bilateral reconstructions. CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows that, despite an increased cost, acellular dermal matrix is a cost effective technology for patients undergoing two-stage, expander-implant immediate breast reconstruction due to its increased utility in successful procedures.

Balancing the presentation of information and options in patient decision aids: an updated review.

BACKGROUND: Standards for patient decision aids require that information and options be presented in a balanced manner; this requirement is based on the argument that balanced presentation is essential to foster informed decision making. If information is presented in an incomplete/non-neutral manner, it can stimulate cognitive biases that can unduly affect individuals' knowledge, perceptions of risks and benefits, and, ultimately, preferences. However, there is little clarity about what constitutes balance, and how it can be determined and enhanced. We conducted a literature review to examine the theoretical and empirical evidence related to balancing the presentation of information and options. METHODS: A literature search related to patient decision aids and balance was conducted on Medline, using MeSH terms and PubMed; this search supplemented the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration's review of patient decision aids trials. Only English language articles relevant to patient decision making and addressing the balance of information and options were included. All members of the team independently screened clusters of articles; uncertainties were resolved by seeking review by another member. The team then worked in sub-groups to extract and synthesise data on theory, definitions, and evidence reported in these studies. RESULTS: A total of 40 articles met the inclusion criteria. Of these, six explained the rationale for balancing the presentation of information and options. Twelve defined "balance"; the definition of "balance" that emerged is as follows: "The complete and unbiased presentation of the relevant options and the information about those options-in content and in format-in a way that enables individuals to process this information without bias". Ten of the 40 articles reported assessing the balance of the relevant decision aid. All 10 did so exclusively from the users' or patients' perspective, using a five-point Likert-type scale. Presenting information in a side-by-side display form was associated with more respondents (ranging from 70% to 96%) judging the information as "balanced". CONCLUSION: There is a need for comparative studies investigating different ways to improve and measure balance in the presentation of information and options in patient decision aids.