Improving Access to Bariatric Surgery for Rural and Remote Patients: Experiences from a State-Wide Bariatric Telehealth Service in Australia

The provision of general surgery in rural Australia: a narrative review

Rural surgery is most commonly provided by general surgeons to the 29% of people (7 million) living in rural Australia. The provision of rural general surgery to enable equitable and safe surgical care for rural Australians is a multifaceted issue concerning recruitment, training, retention, surgical procedures and surgical outcomes. Sustaining the rural general surgical workforce will be dependent upon growing an increased number of resident rural general surgeons, as well as changed models of care, with a need for ongoing review to track the outcomes of these changes. To increase recruitment, rural general surgical training must improve to be less stressful for trainees and to be incorporated alongside a rural-facing generalist curriculum. Rural general surgical outcomes (excluding some oncology conditions) achieve comparable results to metropolitan centres. Access to, and outcomes of, surgical oncology services continues to be inequitable for rural Australians and should be a major focus for improved service delivery.

A mixed-method study to inform the development and implementation of eHealth in a bariatric surgery service in an Australian public hospital

AIM

This study aimed to explore patient barriers to accessing services, current technology ownership/use and digital device preferences for accessing health information/health service delivery. Additionally, it aimed to explore the Theoretical Domains Framework and the acceptability of future eHealth solutions in bariatric surgery.

METHODS

This mixed-method study (survey and semi-structured interviews) was conducted in a bariatric surgery service in an Australian public hospital. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively, and the qualitative data were deductively and inductively analysed.

RESULTS

This study included 117 participants (n = 102 surveyed and n = 15 interviewed). Most participants were aged ≥51 years (n = 70, 60%), and two-thirds were female (n = 76, 65%). One in three participants reported barriers to accessing services (n = 38, 37%), including parking, travel time, and taking time off work. Most participants preferred to receive or access additional health information via email (n = 84, 82%) and were willing to engage with health professionals via email (n = 92, 90%), text messages (n = 87, 85%), and telephone (n = 85, 83%). Deductive analysis of interviews generated three themes: 'Knowledge', 'Social influence' and 'Behavioural regulation, goals and environmental resources'. The inductive analysis generated one theme: 'Seeing a place for eHealth in service delivery'.

CONCLUSION

This study's findings can potentially influence the development of future eHealth solutions. Text message, email, and online approaches may be suitable for delivering further information and resources to patients, particularly regarding diet and physical activity. Online health communities are being used by patients for social support and may be worth further investigation. In addition, developing a bariatric surgery mobile application may be beneficial.

Patient-performed at-home surgical drain removal is safe and feasible following hernia repair and abdominal wall reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Traditionally, surgical drains are considered a relative contraindication to telemedicine-based postoperative care. We sought to assess the safety, feasibility, and outcomes of an at-home patient-performed surgical drain removal pilot program.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study among patients who were discharged with surgical drains was performed. Patients discharged with drains were given the option for in-clinic, provider-performed removal, or at-home, patient-performed drain removal. Patient demographics, health characteristics, perioperative metrics, and operative outcomes were compared and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 68 encounters with drain removal were included (at-home: 28%, n = 19; in-clinic: 72%, n = 49), with both groups having similar demographics, except for age (median age of telemedicine-based at-home: 50 vs in-clinic: 62 years, p = 0.03). Patients who opted into at-home, patient-performed drain removal were more likely to have drain removal occur earlier (9 vs 13 days for in-clinic, p < 0.001). In-clinic removal resulted in increased encounters with surgical nursing staff and increased travel time, with no significant difference in complication burden.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-performed at-home drain removal is safe and allows for more timely drain removal.

Clinical Outcomes and Hospital Utilization Among Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery With Telemedicine Preoperative Care

Importance

Bariatric surgery is the mainstay of treatment for medically refractory obesity; however, it is underutilized. Telemedicine affords patient cost and time savings and may increase availability and accessibility of bariatric surgery.

Objective

To determine clinical outcomes and postoperative hospital utilization for patients undergoing bariatric surgery who receive fully remote vs in-person preoperative care.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study comparing postoperative clinical outcomes and hospital utilization after telemedicine or in-person preoperative surgical evaluation included patients treated at a US academic hospital. Participants underwent laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass or laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy after telemedicine or in-person preoperative surgical evaluation between July 1, 2020, to December 22, 2021, or January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2019, respectively. Follow-up was 60 days from date of surgery.

Exposures

Telemedicine-based preoperative care.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Clinical outcomes, including operating room delay, procedure duration, length of hospital stay (LOS), and major adverse events (MAE), and postoperative hospital resource utilization, including emergency department (ED) visit or hospital readmission within 30 days of the surgical procedure.

Results

A total of 1182 patients were included; patients in the telemedicine group were younger (mean [SD] age, 40.8 [12.5] years vs 43.0 [12.2] years; P = .01) and more likely to be female (230 of 257 [89.5%] vs 766 of 925 [82.8%]; P = .01) compared with the control group. The control group had a higher frequency of comorbidity (887 of 925 [95.9%] vs 208 of 257 [80.9%]; P < .001). The telemedicine group was found to be noninferior to the control group with respect to operating room delay (mean [SD] minutes, 7.8 [25.1]; 95% CI, 5.1-10.5 vs 4.2 [11.1]; 95% CI, 1.0-7.4; P = .002), procedure duration (mean [SD] minutes, 134.4 [52.8]; 95% CI, 130.9-137.8 vs 105.3 [41.5]; 95% CI, 100.2-110.4; P < .001), LOS (mean [SD] days, 1.9 [1.1]; 95% CI, 1.8-1.9 vs 2.1 [1.0]; 95% CI, 1.9-2.2; P < .001), MAE within 30 days (3.8%; 95% CI, 3.0%-5.7% vs 1.6%; 95% CI, 0.4%-3.9%; P = .001), MAE between 31 and 60 days (2.2%; 95% CI, 1.3%-3.3% vs 1.6%; 95% CI, 0.4%-3.9%; P < .001), frequency of ER visits (18.8%; 95% CI, 16.3%-21.4% vs 17.9%; 95% CI, 13.2%-22.6%; P = .03), and hospital readmission (10.1%; 95% CI, 8.1%-12.0% vs 6.6%; 95% CI, 3.9%-10.4%; P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this cohort study, clinical outcomes in the telemedicine group were not inferior to the control group. This observation suggests that telemedicine can be used safely and effectively for bariatric surgical preoperative care.

The impact of socioeconomic status on telemedicine utilization during the COVID-19 pandemic among surgical clinics at an academic tertiary care center

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic caused many surgical providers to conduct outpatient evaluations using remote audiovisual conferencing technology (i.e., telemedicine) for the first time in 2020. We describe our year-long institutional experience with telemedicine in several general surgery clinics at an academic tertiary care center and examine the relationship between area-based socioeconomic measures and the likelihood of telemedicine participation.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of our outpatient telemedicine utilization among four subspecialty clinics (including two acute care and two elective surgery clinics). Geocoding was used to link patient visit data to area-based socioeconomic measures and a multivariable analysis was performed to examine the relationship between socioeconomic indicators and patient participation in telemedicine.

RESULTS

While total outpatient visits per month reached a nadir in April 2020 (65% decrease in patient visits when compared to January 2020), there was a sharp increase in telemedicine utilization during the same month (38% of all visits compared to 0.8% of all visits in the month prior). Higher rates of telemedicine utilization were observed in the two elective surgery clinics (61% and 54%) compared to the two acute care surgery clinics (14% and 9%). A multivariable analysis demonstrated a borderline-significant linear trend (p = 0.07) between decreasing socioeconomic status and decreasing odds of telemedicine participation among elective surgery visits. A sensitivity analysis to examine the reliability of this trend showed similar results.

CONCLUSION

Telemedicine has many patient-centered benefits, and this study demonstrates that for certain elective subspecialty clinics, telemedicine may be utilized as the preferred method for surgical consultations. However, to ensure the equitable adoption and advancement of telemedicine services, healthcare providers will need to focus on mitigating the socioeconomic barriers to telemedicine participation.

The effects of using telemedicine for introductory bariatric surgery seminars during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic required immediate systematic change in healthcare delivery. Many institutions relied on telemedicine as an alternative to in-person visits. There is limited data in the bariatric surgery literature to determine how telemedicine impacts patient volume. This study evaluates the effects of using telemedicine for introductory bariatric surgery seminars on patient volume at a single institution.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed before and after implementing virtual introductory seminars for bariatric surgery patients at a comprehensive metabolic and surgery center. The effect on attendance rates for introductory seminars and completion rates of bariatric surgery was evaluated.

Results

The introductory seminar attendance rate for the in-person/pre-telemedicine period, April 2019 to February 2020, was compared to that of the virtual/post-telemedicine period, June 2020 to April 2021. A total of 836 patients registered for an introductory seminar during the pre-telemedicine period with a 65.79% attendance rate. In the post-telemedicine period, 806 patients registered with a 67.87% attendance rate, which was not statistically different (p = 0.37, 95% CI − 0.03–0.07). Completion rates of bariatric surgery were analyzed using June 2019 to October 2019 as the pre-telemedicine period and June 2020 to October 2020 as the post-telemedicine period. Similarly, there was no difference between the pre-telemedicine surgery rate of 23.43% and post-telemedicine surgery rate of 19.68% (p = 0.31, 95% CI − 0.11–0.04).

Conclusion

Despite abruptly transitioning to virtual introductory bariatric seminars, there was no change in attendance rates nor was there a difference in the number of patients progressing through the program and undergoing bariatric surgery at our institution. This demonstrates similar efficacy of telemedicine and in-person introductory seminars for bariatric surgery patients, which supports telemedicine as a promising tool for this patient population in the post-pandemic era.

Graphical abstract

Does Hypothetical Centralization of Revision THA and TKA Exacerbate Existing Geographic or Demographic Disparities in Access to Care by Increased Patient Travel Distances or Times? A Large-database Study

BACKGROUND

Higher hospital volume is associated with lower rates of adverse outcomes after revision total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Centralizing revision TJA care to higher-volume hospitals might reduce early complication and readmission rates after revision TJA; however, the effect of centralizing revision TJA care on patient populations who are more likely to experience challenges with access to care is unknown.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does a hypothetical policy of transferring patients undergoing revision TJA from lower-to higher-volume hospitals increase patient travel distance and time? (2) Does a hypothetical policy of transferring patients undergoing revision TJA from lower- to higher-volume hospitals disproportionately affect travel distance or time in low income, rural, or racial/ethnic minority populations?

METHODS

Using the Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups 466-468, we identified 37,147 patients with inpatient stays undergoing revision TJA from 2008 to 2016 in the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System administrative database for New York State. Revisions with missing or out-of-state patient identifiers (3474 of 37,147) or those associated with closed or merged facilities (180 of 37,147) were excluded. We chose this database for our study because of relative advantages to other available databases: comprehensive catchment of all surgical procedures in New York State, regardless of payer; each patient can be followed across episodes of care and hospitals in New York State; and New York State has an excellent cross-section of hospital types for TJA, including rural and urban hospitals, critical access hospitals, and some of the highest-volume centers for TJA in the United States. We divided hospitals into quartiles based on the mean revision TJA volume. Overall, 80% (118 of 147) of hospitals were not for profit, 18% (26 of 147) were government owned, 78% (115 of 147) were located in urban areas, and 48% (70 of 147) had fewer than 200 beds. The mean patient age was 66 years old, 59% (19,888 of 33,493) of patients were females, 79% (26,376 of 33,493) were white, 82% (27,410 of 33,493) were elective admissions, and 56% (18,656 of 33,493) of admissions were from government insurance. Three policy scenarios were evaluated: transferring patients from the lowest 25% by volume hospitals, transferring patients in the lowest 50% by volume hospitals, and transferring patients in the lowest 75% by volume hospitals to the nearest higher-volume institution by distance. Patients who changed hospitals and travelled more than 60 miles or longer than 60 minutes with consideration for average traffic patterns after the policy was enacted were considered adversely affected. The secondary outcome of interest was the impact of the three centralization policies, as defined above, on lower-income, nonwhite, rural versus urban counties, and Hispanic ethnicity.

RESULTS

Transferring patients from the lowest 25% by volume hospitals resulted in only one patient stay that was affected by an increase in travel distance and travel time. Transferring patients from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals resulted in 9% (3050 of 33,493) of patients being transferred, with only 1% (312 of 33,493) of patients affected by either an increased travel distance or travel time. Transferring patients from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals resulted in 28% (9323 of 33,493) of patients being transferred, with 2% (814 of 33,493) of patients affected by either an increased travel distance or travel time. Nonwhite patients were less likely to encounter an increased travel distance or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (odds ratio 0.31 [95% CI 0.15 to 0.65]; p = 0.002) or being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 0.10 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.15]; p < 0.001) than white patients were. Hispanic patients were more likely to experience increased travel distance or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 12.3 [95% CI 5.04 to 30.2]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 3.24 [95% CI 2.24 to 4.68]; p < 0.001) than non-Hispanic patients were. Patients from a county with a lower median income were more likely to experience increased travel distances or time after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 69.5 [95% CI 17.0 to 283]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 3.86 [95% CI 3.21 to 4.64]; p < 0.001) than patients from counties with a higher median income. Patients from rural counties were more likely to be affected after being transferred from the lowest 50% by volume hospitals (OR 98 [95% CI 49.6 to 192.2]; p < 0.001) and being transferred from the lowest 75% by volume hospitals (OR 11.7 [95% CI 9.89 to 14.0]; p < 0.001) than patients from urban counties.

CONCLUSION

Although centralizing revision TJA care to higher-volume institutions in New York State did not appear to increase the travel burden for most patients, policies that centralize revision TJA care will need to be carefully designed to minimize the disproportionate impact on patient populations that already face challenges with access to healthcare. Further studies should examine the feasibility of establishing centers of excellence designations for revision TJA, the effect of best practices adoption by lower volume institutions to improve revision TJA care, and the potential role of care-extending technology such as telemedicine to improve access to care to reduce the effects of travel distances on affected patient populations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, prognostic study.

Telemedicine in Surgical Care in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Scoping Review

Background

Access to timely and quality surgical care is limited in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Telemedicine, defined as the remote provision of health care using information, communication and telecommunication platforms have the potential to address some of the barriers to surgical care. However, synthesis of evidence on telemedicine use in surgical care in LMICs is lacking.

Aim

To describe the current state of evidence on the use and distribution of telemedicine for surgical care in LMICs.

Methods

This was a scoping review of published and relevant grey literature on telemedicine use for surgical care in LMICs, following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews guideline. PubMed-Medline, Web of Science, Scopus and African Journals Online databases were searched using a comprehensive search strategy from 1 January 2010 to 28 February 2021.

Results

A total of 178 articles from 53 (38.7%) LMICs across 11 surgical specialties were included. The number of published articles increased from 2 in 2010 to 44 in 2020. The highest number of studies was from the World Health Organization Western Pacific region (n = 73; 41.0%) and of these, most were from China (n = 69; 94.5%). The most common telemedicine platforms used were telephone call (n = 71, 39.9%), video chat (n = 42, 23.6%) and WhatsApp/WeChat (n = 31, 17.4%). Telemedicine was mostly used for post-operative follow-up (n = 71, 39.9%), patient education (n = 32, 18.0%), provider training (n = 28, 15.7%) and provider-provider consultation (n = 16, 9.0%). Less than a third (n = 51, 29.1%) of the studies used a randomised controlled trial design, and only 23 (12.9%) reported effects on clinical outcomes.

Conclusion

Telemedicine use for surgical care is emerging in LMICs, especially for post-operative visits. Basic platforms such as telephone calls and 2-way texting were successfully used for post-operative follow-up and education. In addition, file sharing and video chatting options were added when a physical assessment was required. Telephone calls and 2-way texting platforms should be leveraged to reduce loss to follow-up of surgical patients in LMICs and their use for pre-operative visits should be further explored. Despite these telemedicine potentials, there remains an uneven adoption across several LMICs. Also, up to two-thirds of the studies were of low-to-moderate quality with only a few focusing on clinical effectiveness. There is a need to further adopt, develop, and validate telemedicine use for surgical care in LMICs, particularly its impact on clinical outcomes.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00268-022-06549-2.

Telehealth During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Registered Dietitian Nutritionists

During the current coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, health care practices have shifted to minimize virus transmission, with unprecedented expansion of telehealth. This study describes self-reported changes in registered dietitian nutritionist (RDN) practice related to delivery of nutrition care via telehealth shortly after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. This cross-sectional, anonymous online survey was administered from mid-April to mid-May 2020 to RDNs in the United States providing face-to-face nutrition care prior to the COVID-19 pandemic. This survey included 54 questions about practitioner demographics and experience and current practices providing nutrition care via telehealth, including billing procedures, and was completed by 2016 RDNs with a median (interquartile range) of 15 (6-27) years of experience in dietetics practice. Although 37% of respondents reported that they provided nutrition care via telehealth prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, this proportion was 78% at the time of the survey. Respondents reported spending a median (interquartile range) of 30 (20-45) minutes in direct contact with the individual/group per telehealth session. The most frequently reported barriers to delivering nutrition care via telehealth were lack of client interest (29%) and Internet access (26%) and inability to conduct or evaluate typical nutrition assessment or monitoring/evaluation activities (28%). Frequently reported benefits included promoting compliance with social distancing (66%) and scheduling flexibility (50%). About half of RDNs or their employers sometimes or always bill for telehealth services, and of those, 61% are sometimes or always reimbursed. Based on RDN needs, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics continues to advocate and provide resources for providing effective telehealth and receiving reimbursement via appropriate coding and billing. Moving forward, it will be important for RDNs to participate fully in health care delivered by telehealth and telehealth research both during and after the COVID-19 public health emergency.

Are eHealth interventions for adults who are scheduled for or have undergone bariatric surgery as effective as usual care? A systematic review

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effect of eHealth-delivered interventions for adults who undergo bariatric surgery on postoperative weight loss, weight loss maintenance, eating psychopathology, quality of life, depression screening, and self-efficacy. Six electronic databases were searched, with 14 studies (across 17 reports) included, involving 1633 participants. With substantial heterogeneity, qualitative descriptions have been provided. Interventions were delivered via an online program or internet modules (n = 2), telephone (n = 2), text messages (n = 2), videoconferencing (n = 3), mobile application (n = 1), and audiovisual media (n = 1). Three studies included a combination, including internet modules and telephone (n = 1), wireless fidelity scales, emails, and telephone (n = 1), and a combination of online treatment, weekly emails, and access to a private Facebook group (n = 1). All the eHealth interventions, except for one, implemented behavior change techniques, including self-monitoring, problem solving, social support, goal setting, and shaping knowledge. Both eHealth intervention and control groups lost weight across the included studies, and eHealth was found to be as effective as or more effective than the control for weight loss. Two studies measured weight loss maintenance; both eHealth and control groups regained weight in the longer term. The interventions showed significant improvement on assessment measures for eating psychopathology. In conclusion, when bariatric surgery patients have limited or no access to healthcare teams or require additional support, eHealth may be a suitable option. Future studies implementing eHealth interventions would benefit from reporting intervention components as per the behavior change techniques taxonomy and further consideration of delivering eHealth in a stepped care approach would be beneficial.

Telematics pre-operative psychological and nutritional assessment in candidates for bariatric surgery during COVID-19 phase 2: a pilot prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Obesity represents a risk factor for COVID-19 infection. Therefore, in order to reduce COVID-19 related comorbidities in obese population a continuation of obesity treatment is needed. However, bariatric procedures were postponed because of COVID-19 restrictions, delaying treatment for obese patients seeking for surgery. This study aimed to test the feasibility of a telematics pre-operative psychological and nutritional assessment as an alternative tool during COVID-19 outbreak.

METHODS

Twenty-six patients were contacted. The pre-operative assessment consisted in 3-weekly one-to-one online sessions and a final in-person multidisciplinary session. The protocol feasibility has been evaluated on the following outcome: rejection rate (%), dropout rate (%), compliance and satisfaction's degree.

RESULTS

Eighteen participants completed the whole protocol and 10% dropped-out. Seventy-two percent of participants obtained an excess weight loss ≥5%. All participants were satisfied of the telematics assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

COVID-19 emergency has changed standard hospital procedures and this study could represent a landmark for an online pre-operative assessment method to adopt in case of new restrictions.

Remote unaffiliated presurgical psychosocial evaluations: a qualitative assessment of the attitudes of ASMBS members

BACKGROUND

A psychosocial evaluation is an important component of the preoperative assessment process for people seeking metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS), and is required for accreditation of MBS programs. Recently, independent companies without affiliations with MBS programs have been marketing remotely administered, unaffiliated psychosocial evaluations for MBS (RUS), and American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) members have raised concerns about these evaluations.

OBJECTIVES

To explore ASMBS members' beliefs about RUS.

SETTING

Online survey.

METHODS

We developed a survey to evaluate ASMBS members' opinions, experiences, and/or concerns about in-person and RUS psychosocial evaluations for MBS.

RESULTS

In total, 635 ASMBS members responded to the online survey and 156 responded to an open-ended question on RUS. Responses were coded based on a manual developed for this study, yielding themes of concerns about the quality of RUS, lack of ongoing relationships in RUS, and conditions under which/reasons why RUS evaluations could be acceptable.

CONCLUSION

Respondents expressed both interest in and concerns about RUS in pre-MBS psychosocial evaluations. Use of RUS has the potential to improve access to MBS by providing a convenient and efficient means of completing the psychosocial evaluation. Conversely, respondents expressed concerns about the background and training of RUS providers, the quality of the reports, and the limited relationships between the RUS provider and both the MBS patient and the MBS team. We discuss the clinical and research implications of response themes, particularly for patients in rural areas or those who have other barriers to care.

Revisional bariatric surgery to single-anastomosis gastric bypass: a large multi-institutional series

BACKGROUND

Reoperation is often required after bariatric procedures. Single-anastomosis gastric bypass (SAGB) is increasingly utilized as a primary bariatric procedure. Few series document SAGB as a revisional bariatric procedure.

OBJECTIVES

To describe our short-term experience with revisional SAGB, focusing on weight loss and reflux symptom outcomes.

SETTING

Three hospitals in Australia with both private and public (government funded) patients.

METHODS

We reviewed all revisional SAGB cases from 2012 to 2019 at. Complications were considered significant if they were Clavien-Dindo grade 3a or higher. A phone survey was conducted to assess weight loss outcomes, patient satisfaction, reflux symptoms, and other complications.

RESULTS

We identified 254 patients who had a revisional bariatric procedure to SAGB (21 previous sleeve gastrectomies and 233 previous adjustable bands), with a mean follow-up of 22 ± 15.6 months (range, 1-55 mo). The mean percentage of excess weight loss was 77% (183 patients, 72%), and the number of patients with follow-ups at 1 and 4 years was 184 (73%) and 35 patients (14%). Within 30 days, there were 29 patients (11%) who required reinterventions (21 endoscopies, 1 interventional radiology procedure, and 7 reoperations) with no deaths. Beyond 30 days, 27 patients (11%) required rerevision to Roux-en-Y gastric bypass for reflux symptoms and 10 (4%) required a laparotomy or laparoscopy for another reason (e.g., bowel obstruction). At a median follow-up of 36.6 months, 87 patients (34%) completed a phone survey, 45 (52%) of whom were taking proton pump inhibitors and 66 patients (76%) of whom were satisfied with their experience.

CONCLUSION

In our series, revision to SAGB was safe, with low short-term morbidity and favorable weight loss outcomes. However, beyond 1 year, a large proportion of patients experienced severe reflux symptoms and required rerevision.

Where Are My Patients? Lost and Found in Bariatric Surgery

PURPOSE

Follow-up is a cornerstone of the success of bariatric surgery. However, adherence to monitoring decreases over time. The reasons for non-compliance with follow-up still remain unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective, single-center, cohort study, including all patients undergoing bariatric surgery between 2014 and 2017. Patients lost to follow-up were called back and questioned about the reasons of non-adherence. Patients followed and lost to follow-up were compared in terms of weight loss.

RESULTS

Overall, 29.7% of patients were lost to follow-up. After a callback, we obtained information on 89.9% of patients. The first reason of non-attendance was considering follow-up as unnecessary (29.5%). Almost a quarter of patients (24%) discontinued follow-up due to geographic distance, while 23.3%, 18.6%, and 14.0% of patients explained the lack of follow-up due to family, professional, or health problems. Only 7.0% declared to renounce to follow-up because of poor weight loss. Percentage of excess weight loss at 3 and 5 years after surgery was respectively 73.6% and 81.2% in attendant patients, and 70.7% and 68.4% in non-adherent patients (p = ns). Despite a greater weight loss in the group of patients regularly followed, the difference with patients lost to follow-up remained not significant in multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Follow-up is of crucial importance in the management of bariatric patients. Follow-up disruption is associated to individual patient choice and external constraints. In order to improve the quality of long-term care, care providers will probably need to adapt to these constraints, diversifying the offer of care.