Synoptic operative reporting: assessing the completeness, accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of synoptic reporting for Roux-en-Y gastric bypass.

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Synoptic reporting (SR) is one solution to improve the quality of operative reports. However, SR has not been investigated in bariatric surgery despite an identified need by bariatric surgeons. SR for RYGB was developed using quality indicators (QIs) established by a national Delphi process. The objective of this study is to assess the completeness, accuracy, reliability, and efficiency of synoptic versus narrative operative reports (NR) in Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). METHODS: A NR and SR were completed on 104 consecutive RYGBs. Two evaluators independently compared the reports to QIs. Completeness and accuracy measures were determined. Reliability was calculated using Bland-Altman plots and 95% limits of agreement (LOA). Time to complete SR and NR was also compared. RESULTS: The mean completion rate of SR was 99.8% (±SD 0.98%) compared to 64.0% (±SD 6.15%) for NR (t = 57.9, p < 0.001). All subsections of SR were >99% complete. This was significantly higher than for NR (p < 0.001) except for small bowel division details (p = 0.530). Accuracy was significantly higher for SR than NR (94.2% ± SD 4.31% vs. 53.6% ± SD 9.82%, respectively, p < 0.001). Rater agreement was excellent for both SR (0.11, 95% LOA -0.53 to 0.75) and NR (-0.26, 95% LOA -4.85 to 4.33) (p = 0.242), where 0 denotes perfect agreement. SR completion times were significantly shorter than NR (355 min ± SD 126 min and 450 min ± SD 050 min, respectively, p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: The RYGB SR is superior to NR for completeness and accuracy. This platform is also both reliable and efficient. This SR should be incorporated into clinical practice.