Decisional Regret Among Patients Undergoing Colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing colectomy may be at risk for postoperative regret, which is associated with worse quality of life, higher rates of depression, and poorer health outcomes. A better understanding of factors associated with decisional regret may allow surgeons to better tailor preoperative discussions to mitigate the risk of regret. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to identify factors associated with regret in patients undergoing elective and urgent/emergent colectomy. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, a 73-hospital collaborative, which collects clinical data on general surgery operations. PATIENTS: Patients aged >18 years who underwent elective or urgent/emergent colectomy between January 2017 and March 2020 and who completed a decision regret survey. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Any degree of postoperative regret. RESULTS: Of 3638 patients, 2,530 (70%) underwent elective and 1108 (30%) underwent urgent/emergent colectomy. Overall, 381 (10.5%) patients reported regret, with higher rates among the urgent/emergent setting compared with the elective cohort (13.0% vs 9.4%; p < 0.001). In the elective cohort, regret was associated with length of stay >7 days (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.06-5.07), postoperative complication (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.36-2.79), and readmission (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.22-2.95). Elective colectomies for cancer/adenoma/polyp were associated with lower odds of regret (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.91). In the urgent/emergent cohort, regret was associated with female sex (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.15-2.50) and nonhome discharge destination (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.04-1.03). LIMITATIONS: Hospitals used different sampling strategies, limiting our ability to calculate a true response rate and characterize nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: One in 10 patients reported regret after colectomy with higher rates in those undergoing urgent/emergent colectomy. Factors associated with regret were different between surgical settings. Efforts are needed to mitigate patients' risk of regret with individualized discussions contingent on surgical settings to better align expectations and outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C3 . ARREPENTIMIENTO DEL PACIENTE EN LA DECISIN DE SOMETIMIENTO A COLECTOMA: ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes que se someten a una colectomía pueden estar en riesgo de arrepentimiento post operatorio, la cual está asociada con una peor calidad de vida, mayores tasas de depresión y peores resultados de salud. Una mejor comprensión de los factores asociados con el arrepentimiento de dicha decisión, puede permitir a los cirujanos adaptar de una mejor manera las discusiones preoperatorias y así mitigar el riesgo de arrepentimiento.OBJETIVO:Identificar factores asociados al arrepentimiento en pacientes sometidos a colectomía electiva y urgente/emergente.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, una colaboración de 73 hospitales.PACIENTES:Pacientes ≥18 años sometidos a colectomía electiva o urgente/emergente entre enero de 2017 y marzo de 2020, y que hayan completado una encuesta de arrepentimiento en cuanto a la decisión.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Reporte de cualquier grado de arrepentimiento postoperatorio.RESULTADOS:De 3.638 pacientes, 2.530 (70%) fueron sometidos a colectomía electiva y 1.108 (30%) a colectomía urgente/emergente. En general, 381 (10,5%) pacientes informaron arrepentimiento, con tasas más altas en el grupo relacionado con el escenario urgente/emergente en comparación con la cohorte electiva (13,0% frente a 9,4%, p < 0,001). En la cohorte electiva, el arrepentimiento se asoció con una estancia hospitalaria >7 días (OR 2,32, IC 95% 1,06-5,07), complicación posoperatoria (OR 1,95, IC 95% 1,36-2,79) y reingreso (OR 1,90, IC 95% 1,22-2,95). Las colectomías electivas por cáncer/adenoma/pólipo se asociaron con una menor probabilidad de arrepentimiento (OR 0,68, IC 95%: 0,50-0,91). En la cohorte urgente/emergente, el arrepentimiento se asoció con el sexo femenino (OR 1,69, IC 95% 1,15-2,50) y el destino del alta no domiciliario (OR 1,61, IC 95% 0,04-1,03).LIMITACIONES:Los hospitales utilizaron diferentes estrategias de muestreo, lo que limita nuestra capacidad para calcular una tasa de respuesta real y caracterizar a los que no respondieron.CONCLUSIONES:Uno de cada diez pacientes reportó arrepentimiento después de la colectomía con tasas más altas en aquellos sometidos a colectomía urgente/emergente. Los factores asociados con el arrepentimiento fueron diferentes entre los entornos quirúrgicos. Se necesitan esfuerzos para mitigar el riesgo de arrepentimiento de los pacientes con discusiones individualizadas supeditadas al entorno quirúrgico para caracterizar de una mejor las expectativas y los resultados. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C3 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto).

Internet Usage Trends in Thoracic Surgery Patients and Their Caregivers.

With trends toward increasing patient involvement in medical decision-making, decreasing clinic times, and the availability of the Internet, patients and their caregivers are increasingly researching cancer diagnoses online. It is essential for physicians to understand patient Internet usage as it relates to their own health education. Internet usage trends have been studied in various areas, but not in thoracic diseases. This prospective cohort study surveyed 337 thoracic surgery patients and their caregivers with both cancer and non-cancer diagnoses to examine their Internet usage trends. Cancer subjects were more likely to research their condition online if they were younger, had a higher income, had a higher education level, and were currently employed. Only age and income level were predictive for non-cancer subjects. Separately, cancer subjects were more likely to trust information found on the Internet if they had a higher education. Subjects were most likely to conduct research on a hospital website than other websites. These data will be helpful to thoracic surgeons who want to appropriately educate patients and their caregivers and direct them to reliable Internet sources. These data also illustrate the importance of developing trustworthy hospital websites with disease-specific information.

Comparison of patient-reported outcomes after traumatic upper extremity amputation: Replantation versus prosthetic rehabilitation.

BACKGROUND: After major upper extremity traumatic amputation, replantation is attempted based upon the assumption that outcomes for a replanted limb exceed those for revision amputation with prosthetic rehabilitation. While some reports have examined functional differences between these patients, it is increasingly apparent that patient perceptions are also critical determinants of success. Currently, little patient-reported outcomes data exists to support surgical decision-making in the setting of major upper extremity traumatic amputation. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to directly compare patient-reported outcomes after replantation versus prosthetic rehabilitation. METHODS: At three tertiary care centers, patients with a history of traumatic unilateral upper extremity amputation at or between the radiocarpal and elbow joints were identified. Patients who underwent either successful replantation or revision amputation with prosthetic rehabilitation were contacted. Patient-reported health status was evaluated with both DASH and MHQ instruments. Intergroup comparisons were performed for aggregate DASH score, aggregate MHQ score on the injured side, and each MHQ domain. RESULTS: Nine patients with successful replantation and 22 amputees who underwent prosthetic rehabilitation were enrolled. Aggregate MHQ score for the affected extremity was significantly higher for the Replantation group compared to the Prosthetic Rehabilitation group (47.2 vs. 35.1, p<0.05). Among the MHQ domains, significant advantages to replantation were demonstrated with respect to overall function (41.1 vs. 19.7, p=0.03), ADLs (28.3 vs. 6.0, p=0.03), and patient satisfaction (46.0 vs. 24.4, p=0.03). Additionally, Replantation patients had a lower mean DASH score (24.6 vs. 39.8, p=0.08). CONCLUSIONS: Patients in this study who experienced major upper extremity traumatic amputation reported more favorable patient-reported outcomes after successful replantation compared to revision amputation with prosthetic rehabilitation.