Racial disparities in selected micronutrient deficiencies after bariatric surgery: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery has been associated with numerous micronutrient deficiencies. Several observational studies have found that these deficiencies are more common in racially/ethnically minoritized patients. OBJECTIVES: To conduct a systematic review to investigate whether racially/ethnically minoritized patients experience worse nutritional outcomes after bariatric surgery. SETTING: University of Wisconsin-Madison. METHODS: PubMed, CINAHL, PsychINFO, and Cochrane databases were queried. We searched for manuscripts that reported micronutrient levels or conditions related to micronutrient deficiencies according to race/ethnicity (White, African American/Black, and Hispanic) after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy or Roux-en-Y gastric bypass between 2002 and 2022. Eleven micronutrients (vitamins A, B1 [thiamine], B12, D, E, K, calcium, copper, folate, iron, and zinc), and four conditions (anemia, bone loss, fractures, and hyperparathyroidism) were assessed. RESULTS: Abstracts from 953 manuscripts were screened; 18 full-text manuscripts were reviewed for eligibility, and ten met the inclusion criteria. Compared to White patients, African Americans had a higher prevalence of thiamine, vitamin D, and vitamin A deficiencies. There were no differences in calcium and vitamin B12 deficiencies. The other six micronutrients were not assessed according to race/ethnicity. Hyperparathyroidism was more prevalent in African Americans than White patients in the three studies that evaluated it. The prevalence of fractures was mixed. Anemia and bone loss were not evaluated according to race/ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Although the literature on micronutrient outcomes following bariatric surgery according to race/ethnicity is limited, African Americans appear to experience a higher prevalence of vitamin deficiencies and associated conditions. Qualitative and quantitative research to explore these disparities is warranted.

Optimization of the Electronic Health Record for Research.

Mini Abstract This surgical perspective highlights the current limitations of utilizing the electronic health record for research and discusses directions for future optimization.

Identifying Young Adults at High Risk for Weight Gain Using Machine Learning.

INTRODUCTION: Weight gain among young adults continues to increase. Identifying adults at high risk for weight gain and intervening before they gain weight could have a major public health impact. Our objective was to develop and test electronic health record-based machine learning models to predict weight gain in young adults with overweight/class 1 obesity. METHODS: Seven machine learning models were assessed, including three regression models, random forest, single-layer neural network, gradient-boosted decision trees, and support vector machine (SVM) models. Four categories of predictors were included: 1) demographics; 2) obesity-related health conditions; 3) laboratory data and vital signs; and 4) neighborhood-level variables. The cohort was split 60:40 for model training and validation. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) were calculated to determine model accuracy at predicting high-risk individuals, defined by ≥ 10% total body weight gain within 2 y. Variable importance was measured via generalized analysis of variance procedures. RESULTS: Of the 24,183 patients (mean [SD] age, 32.0 [6.3] y; 55.1% females) in the study, 14.2% gained ≥10% total body weight. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves varied from 0.557 (SVM) to 0.675 (gradient-boosted decision trees). Age, sex, and baseline body mass index were the most important predictors among the models except SVM and neural network. CONCLUSIONS: Our machine learning models performed similarly and had modest accuracy for identifying young adults at risk of weight gain. Future models may need to incorporate behavioral and/or genetic information to enhance model accuracy.

Patient and Provider Perceptions About Communication After Bariatric Surgery: A Qualitative Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Communication between patients and providers can strongly influence patient behavior after surgery. The objective of this study was to assess patient and provider perceptions of how communication affected weight-related behaviors after bariatric surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Semistructured interviews with bariatric surgery patients and providers were conducted from April-November 2020. Patients who had Medicaid within 3 y of surgery were defined as socioeconomically disadvantaged. Interview guides were derived from Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services and Torain's Framework for Surgical Disparities. Participants described postoperative experiences regarding diet, physical activity, and follow-up care. A codebook was developed deductively based on the two theories. Directed content analysis identified themes pertaining to patient-provider communication. RESULTS: Forty-five participants were interviewed, including 24 patients (83% female; 79% White), six primary care providers, four health psychologists, five registered dietitians, and six bariatric surgeons. Four themes regarding communication emerged: (1) Patients experiencing weight regain did not want to follow-up with providers to discuss their weight; (2) Patients from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds had less trust and required more rapport-building from providers to enhance trust; (3) Patients felt that providers did not get to know them personally, which was perceived as a lack of personalized communication; and (4) Providers often changed their language to be simpler, so patients could understand them. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-provider communication after bariatric surgery is essential, but perceptions about the elements of communication differ between patients and providers. Reassuring patients who have attained less weight loss than expected and establishing trust with socioeconomically vulnerable patients could strengthen care after bariatric surgery.

A Review and Assessment of Open Access Surgery Journals.

INTRODUCTION: Open access publishing has exhibited rapid growth in recent years. However, there is uncertainty surrounding the quality of open access journals and their ability to reach target audiences. This study reviews and characterizes open access surgical journals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The directory of open access journals was used to search for open access surgical journals. PubMed indexing status, impact factor, article processing charge (APC), initial year of open access publishing, average weeks from manuscript submission to publication, publisher, and peer-review processes were evaluated. RESULTS: Ninety-two open access surgical journals were identified. Most (n = 49, 53.3%) were indexed in PubMed. Journals established >10 y were more likely to be indexed in PubMed compared to journals established <5 y (28 of 41 [68.3%] versus 4 of 20 [20%], P < 0.001). 44 journals (47.8%) used a double-blind review method. 49 (53.2%) journals received an impact factor for 2021, ranging from <0.1 to 10.2 (median 1.4). The median APC was $362 United States dollar [interquartile range $0 - 1802 United States dollar]. 35 journals (38%) did not charge a processing fee. There was a significant positive correlation between the APC and impact factor (r = 0.61, P < 0.001). If accepted, the median time from manuscript submission to publication was 12 wk. CONCLUSIONS: Open access surgical journals are largely indexed on PubMed, have transparent review processes, employ variable APCs (including no publication fees), and proceed efficiently from submission to publication. These results should increase readers' confidence in the quality of surgical literature published in open access journals.

Emerging From the Pandemic: How Has Academic Surgery Changed?

Academic surgery has changed along with the rest of the world in response to the COVID pandemic. With increasing rates of vaccination against COVID over the past 2 y, we have slowly but steadily made progress toward controlling the spread of the virus. Surgeons, academic surgery departments, health systems, and trainees are all attempting to establish a new normal in various domains-clinical, research, teaching, and in their personal lives. How has the pandemic changed these areas? At the 2022 Academic Surgical Congress Hot Topics session, we attempted to address these issues.

Impact of COVID-19 on the Postoperative Bariatric Surgery Patient Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize patient and provider perceptions of the impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on weight loss following bariatric surgery. BACKGROUND: COVID-19 has disrupted routines and healthcare throughout the United States, but its impact on bariatric surgery patients' postoperative experience is unknown. METHODS: Semistructured interviews with bariatric surgery patients, primary care providers, and health psychologists were conducted from April to November 2020. As part of a secondary analysis, patients and providers described how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the postoperative experience within 3 domains: dietary habits, physical activity, and follow-up care. Interview guides were created from 2 conceptual models: Torain's Surgical Disparities Model and Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use. Study team members derived codes, which were grouped into themes using conventional content analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-four participants were interviewed: 24 patients (12 Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and 12 sleeve gastrectomy), 6 primary care providers, and 4 health psychologists. Patients were predominately female (83%) and White (79%). Providers were predominately female (90%) and White (100%). COVID-19 affected the postoperative bariatric surgery patient experience via 3 mechanisms: (1) it disrupted dietary and physical activity routines due to facility closures and fear of COVID-19 exposure; (2) it required patients to transition their follow-up care to telemedicine delivery; and (3) it increased stress due to financial and psychosocial challenges. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 has exacerbated patient vulnerability. The pandemic is not over, thus bariatric surgery patients need ongoing support to access mental health professionals, develop new physical activity routines, and counteract increased food insecurity.

Socioeconomic disparities and bariatric surgery outcomes: A qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in socioeconomic status (SES) have been associated with less weight loss after bariatric surgery. The objective of this study was to identify socioeconomic barriers to weight loss after bariatric surgery. METHODS: We performed semi-structured interviews with bariatric surgery patients and providers from April-November 2020. Participants were asked to describe their post-operative experiences regarding dietary habits, physical activity, and follow-up care. Interview data were coded using Directed Content Analysis based on domains in Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use and Torain's Surgical Disparities Model. RESULTS: 24 patients (median of 4.1 years post-operatively; mean age 50.6 ± 10.7 years; 12 bypass and 12 sleeve; 83% female) and 21 providers (6 bariatric surgeons, 5 registered dietitians, 4 health psychologists, and 6 primary care providers) were interviewed. Barriers to weight loss included: 1) challenging employment situations; 2) limited income; 3) unreliable transportation; 4) unsafe/inconvenient neighborhoods; and 5) limited health literacy. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions targeting socioeconomic barriers to weight loss are needed to support patients, particularly those who are socioeconomically disadvantaged.

Association between neighborhood food environments and bariatric surgery outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Individual characteristics associated with weight loss after bariatric surgery are well established, but the neighborhood characteristics that influence outcomes are unknown. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to determine if neighborhood characteristics, including social determinants and lifestyle characteristics, were associated with weight loss after bariatric surgery. SETTING: Single university healthcare system, United States. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, all patients who underwent primary bariatric surgery from 2008 to 2017 and had at least 1 year of follow-up data were included. Patient-level demographics and neighborhood-level social determinants (area deprivation index, urbanicity, and walkability) and lifestyle factors (organic food use, fresh fruit/vegetable consumption, diet to maintain weight, soda consumption, and exercise) were analyzed. Median regression with percent total body weight (%TBW) loss as the outcome was applied to examine factors associated with weight loss after surgery. RESULTS: Of the 647 patients who met inclusion criteria, the average follow-up period was 3.1 years, and the mean %TBW loss at the follow-up was 22%. In adjusted median regression analyses, Roux-en-Y gastric bypass was associated with greater %TBW loss (11.22%, 95% confidence interval [8.96, 13.48]) compared to sleeve, while longer follow-up time (-2.42% TBW loss per year, 95% confidence interval [-4.63, -0.20]) and a preoperative diagnosis of diabetes (-1.00% TBW loss, 95% confidence interval [-1.55, -0.44]) were associated with less. None of the 8 neighborhood level characteristics was associated with weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: Patient characteristics rather than neighborhood-level social determinants and lifestyle factors were associated with weight loss after bariatric surgery in our cohort of bariatric surgery patients. Patients from socioeconomically deprived neighborhoods can achieve excellent weight loss after bariatric surgery.

Obesity and "obesity-related" cancers: are there body mass index cut-points?

BACKGROUND: Despite compelling links between excess body weight and cancer, body mass index (BMI) cut-points, or thresholds above which cancer incidence increased, have not been identified. The objective of this study was to determine if BMI cut-points exist for 14 obesity-related cancers. SUBJECTS/METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, patients 18-75 years old were included if they had ≥2 clinical encounters with BMI measurements in the electronic health record (EHR) at a single academic medical center from 2008 to 2018. Patients who were pregnant, had a history of cancer, or had undergone bariatric surgery were excluded. Adjusted logistic regression was performed to identify cancers that were associated with increasing BMI. For those cancers, BMI cut-points were calculated using adjusted quantile regression for cancer incidence at 80% sensitivity. Logistic and quantile regression models were adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, and smoking status. RESULTS: A total of 7079 cancer patients (mean age 58.5 years, mean BMI 30.5 kg/m2) and 270,441 non-cancer patients (mean age 43.8 years, mean BMI 28.8 kg/m2) were included in the study. In adjusted logistic regression analyses, statistically significant associations were identified between increasing BMI and the incidence of kidney, thyroid, and uterine cancer. BMI cut-points were identified for kidney (26.3 kg/m2) and uterine (26.9 kg/m2) cancer. CONCLUSIONS: BMI cut-points that accurately predicted development kidney and uterine cancer occurred in the overweight category. Analysis of multi-institutional EHR data may help determine if these relationships are generalizable to other health care settings. If they are, incorporation of BMI into the screening algorithms for these cancers may be warranted.

The 2020 Pandemics: Lessons Learned in Academic Surgery and Beyond.

2020 was a significant year because of the occurrence of two simultaneous public health crises: the coronavirus pandemic and the public health crisis of racism brought into the spotlight by the murder of George Floyd. The coronavirus pandemic has affected all aspects of health care, particularly the delivery of surgical care, surgical education, and academic productivity. The concomitant public health crisis of racism and health inequality during the viral pandemic highlighted opportunities for action to address gaps in surgical care and the delivery of public health services. At the 2021 Academic Surgical Congress Hot Topics session on flexibility and leadership, we also explored how our military surgeon colleagues can provide guidance in leadership during times of crisis. The following is a summary of the issues discussed during the session and reflections on the important lessons learned in academic surgery over the past year.

Individual-level barriers to bariatric surgery from patient and provider perspectives: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Less than 1% adults in the United States who meet body mass index criteria undergo bariatric surgery. Our objective was to identify patient and provider perceptions of individual-level barriers to undergoing bariatric surgery. METHODS: Adults with severe obesity and obesity care providers described their experiences with the bariatric surgery care process in semi-structured interviews. Using conventional content analysis, individual-level barriers were identified within Andersen's Behavioral Model of Health Services Use. RESULTS: Of the 73 individuals interviewed, 36 (49%) were female, and 15 (21%) were non-white. Six individual-level barriers were identified: fear of surgery, fear of lifestyle change, perception that weight had not reached its "tipping point," concerns about dietary changes, lack of social support, and patient characteristics influencing referral. CONCLUSIONS: Patient and provider education should address patient fears of surgery and the belief that surgery is a "last resort." Bariatric surgery programs should strengthen social support networks for patients.

A Qualitative Study of the System-level Barriers to Bariatric Surgery Within the Veterans Health Administration.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize system-level barriers to bariatric surgery from the perspectives of Veterans with severe obesity and obesity care providers. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Bariatric surgery is the most effective weight loss option for Veterans with severe obesity, but fewer than 0.1% of Veterans with severe obesity undergo it. Addressing low utilization of bariatric surgery and weight management services is a priority for the veterans health administration. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with Veterans with severe obesity who were referred for or underwent bariatric surgery, and providers who delivered care to veterans with severe obesity, including bariatric surgeons, primary care providers, registered dietitians, and health psychologists. We asked study participants to describe their experiences with the bariatric surgery delivery process in the VA system. All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Four coders iteratively developed a codebook and used conventional content analysis to identify relevant systems or "contextual" barriers within Andersen Behavioral Model of Health Services Use. RESULTS: Seventy-three semi-structured interviews with veterans (n = 33) and providers (n = 40) throughout the veterans health administration system were completed. More than three-fourths of Veterans were male, whereas nearly three-fourths of the providers were female. Eight themes were mapped onto Andersen model as barriers to bariatric surgery: poor care coordination, lack of bariatric surgery guidelines, limited primary care providers and referring provider knowledge about bariatric surgery, long travel distances, delayed referrals, limited access to healthy foods, difficulties meetings preoperative requirements, and lack of provider availability and/or time. CONCLUSIONS: Addressing system-level barriers by improving coordination of care and standardizing some aspects of bariatric surgery care may improve access to evidence-based severe obesity care within VA.

Antireflux surgery leads to durable improvement in laryngopharyngeal reflux symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Laryngopharyngeal reflux (LPR) symptoms are often present in patients with Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). Whereas antireflux surgery (ARS) provides predictably excellent results in patients with typical GERD, those with atypical symptoms have variable outcomes. The goal of this study was to characterize the response of LPR symptoms to antireflux surgery. METHODS: Patients who underwent ARS between January 2009 and May 2020 were prospectively identified from a single institutional database. Patient-reported information on LPR symptoms was collected at standardized time points (preoperative and 2 weeks, 8 weeks, and 1 year postoperatively) using a validated Reflux Symptom Index (RSI) questionnaire. Patients were grouped by preoperative RSI score: ≤ 13 (normal) and > 13 (abnormal). Baseline characteristics were compared between groups using chi-square test or t-test. A mixed effects model was used to evaluate improvement in RSI scores. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-six patients fulfilled inclusion criteria (mean age 57.8 years, 70% female, mean BMI 29.4). Patients with a preoperative RSI ≤ 13 (n = 61) and RSI > 13 (n = 115) were similar in age, BMI, primary reason for evaluation, DeMeester score, presence of esophagitis, and hiatal hernia (p > 0.05). The RSI > 13 group had more female patients (80 vs 52%, p = < 0.001), higher mean GERD-HRQL score, lower rates of PPI use, and normal esophageal motility. The RSI of all patients improved from a mean preoperative value of 19.2 to 7.8 (2 weeks), 6.1 (8 weeks), and 10.9 (1 year). Those with the highest preoperative scores (RSI > 30) had the best response to ARS. When analyzing individual symptoms, the most likely to improve included heartburn, hoarseness, and choking. CONCLUSIONS: In our study population, patients with LPR symptoms achieved a rapid and durable response to antireflux surgery. Those with higher preoperative RSI scores experienced the greatest improvement. Our data suggest that antireflux surgery is a viable treatment option for this patient population.

Protocol and short-term results for a feasibility randomized controlled trial of a video intervention for Veterans with obesity: The TOTAL (Teaching Obesity Treatment Options to Adult Learners) pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: All three evidence-based treatment options for adults with severe obesity - behavioral weight management, weight management medications (WMM), and bariatric surgery - are underutilized in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) system. Our objective in this study was to develop and pilot-test the TOTAL (Teaching Obesity Treatment Options to Adult Learners) intervention, which seeks to increase Veteran participation in obesity treatment. METHODS: In this single-site, parallel, pilot RCT, Veterans with severe obesity with an upcoming behavioral weight management visit were sent a recruitment letter after meeting inclusion/exclusion criteria via electronic health record screening. Eligible Veterans were randomized to TOTAL or usual care. TOTAL consisted of an 18-min video highlighting obesity health risks and treatment outcomes, eligibility criteria, and pros/cons of all three evidence-based obesity treatments. The primary outcomes were trial design feasibility (recruitment and retention rates) and acceptability to Veterans, which was assessed via semi-structured interviews with participants one week after randomization to TOTAL. Secondary outcomes included attitudes and self-efficacy to initiate treatment one week post-randomization and BMI change six months post-randomization (assessed via Cohen's d). RESULTS: Forty-two Veterans were randomized (recruitment rate = 47.2%), and 40/42 completed one-week assessments (retention rate = 95.2%). The mean participant age was 59.2 ± 11.9 years. Female and non-White participants comprised 14.3% and 11.9% of the cohort, respectively. Semi-structured interviews with all 20 participants who received TOTAL suggested that the delivery logistics and content of TOTAL were acceptable to Veterans. Attitudes toward behavioral weight management and bariatric surgery and weight loss improved in TOTAL vs. usual care patients (Cohen's d ranging from 0.3 to 0.6). CONCLUSIONS: TOTAL was feasible to implement, acceptable to Veterans, and has the potential to increase obesity treatment participation in VHA. An adequately powered RCT is warranted to assess its impact on population-level weight loss. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03856320.