Synoptic operative reporting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy: A multi institutional pilot study evaluating completeness and surgeon perceptions

Synoptic operative reports for pediatric surgical oncology

Synoptic operative notes for pediatric surgical oncology provide standardized and structured documentation of surgical procedures performed on pediatric patients with cancer. These reports capture essential details such as preoperative diagnosis, intraoperative findings, surgical technique, and tumor characteristics in a concise and uniform format. By promoting consistency, accuracy, and completeness in reporting, synoptic operative notes facilitate effective communication among multidisciplinary healthcare teams, enhance quality assurance efforts, and streamline data extraction for research purposes. The integration of synoptic reporting within electronic medical record systems further enhances accessibility and usability, ensuring efficient documentation practices and improved patient care outcomes in pediatric surgical oncology.

Synoptic Operative Reporting in Cervical Cancer Surgeries: Experience From a Single Oncology Center

Objective In today's era of highly methodological oncological practices in place, we have a huge database to regulate, and it is foreseeable that a humongous load of information is ahead of us that we need to organize and comprehend. With the advancement in surgical equipment and evolving procedures, we need to store the information in a transferrable, understandable, and systematic way to prevent any ebb in the future. The systematic recording of operative data is even more important for patient management, training, and research. Standardized reporting also helps surgical residents have a better understanding of all aspects of the procedure. This study aims to analyze the synoptic operative reporting in cervical cancer patients from December 2009 to February 2020 in a single tertiary care center dedicated to providing oncology services to patients. This study will analyze the understandability, volume, and ease of transference of data during the given time period. Methodology The Alberta Cancer Registry was contacted to obtain data from the synoptic operative reports. Synoptic Operative Reports of all the patients operated on cervical cancer from December 2009 to February 2020. Results The data were obtained for 574 patients. As many as 463 patients were operated on for stage 1 and 2 cervical cancers and 10 patients for advanced and recurrent cervical cancer. A total of 101 patients were operated on for high-grade cervical dysplasia (HSIL). Adenocarcinoma was the most common histology. Laparotomy was performed in 308 patients, whereas others had laparoscopic procedures. Details of the surgery from the beginning of the incision to closure were recorded. The cervical cancer template consisted of 356 questions. There were separate templates for advanced and early-stage cancer. However, even with the meticulously detailed report, an average of only eight minutes was taken by each user to complete the template. Conclusion The computerized synoptic operative report has an upper hand over the dictated documentation report along with the ease of execution without missing essential substance. Its utility as an educational tool is very promising. Therefore, we encourage other facilities, especially cancer centers, to use synoptic operative reports more extensively not only for cervical cancer surgeries but also for other ones.

It's time for a minimum synoptic operation template in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite the call to enhance accuracy and value of operation records few international recommended minimal standards for operative notes documentation have been described. This study undertook a systematic review of existing operative reporting systems for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) to fashion a comprehensive, synoptic operative reporting template for the future.

METHODS

A search for all relevant articles was conducted using PubMed version of Medline, Scopus and Web of Science databases in June 2021, for publications from January 1st 2011 to October 25th 2021, using the keywords: laparoscopic cholecystectomy AND operation notes OR operative notes OR proforma OR documentation OR report OR narrative OR audio-visual OR synoptic OR digital. Two reviewers (NOC, GMC) independently assessed each published study using a MINORS score of ≥ 16 for comparative and ≥ 10 for non-comparative for inclusion. This systematic review followed PRISMA guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO. Synoptic operative templates from published data were assimilated into one "ideal" laparoscopic operative report template following international input from the World Society of Emergency Surgery board.

RESULTS

A total of 3567 articles were reviewed. Following MINORS grading 25 studies were selected spanning 14 countries and 4 continents. Twenty-two studies were prospective. A holistic overview of the operative procedure documentation was reported in 6/25 studies and a further 19 papers dealt with selective surgical aspects of LC. A unique synoptic LC operative reporting template was developed and translated into Chinese/Mandarin, French and Arabic.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review identified a paucity of publications dealing with operative reporting of LC. The proposed new template may be integrated digitally with hospitals' medical systems and include additional narrative text and audio-visual data. The template may help define new OR (operating room) recording standards and impact on care for patients undergoing LC.

Motivations and Barriers Toward Implementation of a Rectal Cancer Synoptic Operative Report: A Process Evaluation

BACKGROUND

The use of synoptic reporting has been shown to improve documentation of critical information and provide added value related to data access and extraction, data reliability, relevant detail, and completeness of information. Surgeon acceptance and adoption of synoptic reports has lagged behind other specialties.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the process of implementing a synoptic operative report.

DESIGN

This study was a mixed-methods process evaluation including surveys and qualitative interviews.

SETTINGS

This study focused on colorectal surgery practices across the United States.

PATIENTS

Twenty-eight board-certified colorectal surgeons were included.

INTERVENTIONS

The synoptic operative report for rectal cancer was implemented.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Acceptability, feasibility, and usability were measured by Likert-type survey questions and followed up with individual interviews to elicit experiences with implementation as well as motivations and barriers to use.

RESULTS

Among all study participants, 28 surgeons completed the electronic survey (76% response rate) and 21 (57%) completed the telephone interview. Mean usability was 4.14 (range, 1-5; SE, 0.15), mean feasibility was 3.90 (SE, 0.15), and acceptability was 3.98 (SE, 0.18). Participants indicated that substantial administrative and technical support were necessary but not always available for implementation, and many were frustrated by the need to change their workflow.

LIMITATIONS

Most surgeon participants were male, white, had >12 years in practice, and used Epic electronic medical record systems. Therefore, they may not represent the perspectives of all US colon and rectal surgeons. In addition, as the synoptic operative report is implemented more broadly across the United States, it will be important to consider variations in the process by electronic medical record system.

CONCLUSIONS

The synoptic operative report for rectal cancer was easy to implement and incorporate into workflow, in general, but surgeons remained concerned about additional burden without immediate and tangible value. Despite recognizing benefits, many participants indicated they only implemented the synoptic operative report because it was mandated by the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B735MOTIVACIONES Y BARRERAS HACIA LA IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE UN INFORME OPERATIVO SINÓPTICO DE CÁNCER RECTAL: UNA EVALUACIÓN DEL PROCESOANTECEDENTES:Se ha demostrado que el uso de informes sinópticos mejora la documentación de información crítica y proporciona un valor agregado relacionado con el acceso y extracción de datos, la confiabilidad de los datos, los detalles relevantes y la integridad de la información. La aceptación y adopción de informes sinópticos por parte de los cirujanos se ha quedado rezagada con respecto a otras especialidades.OBJETIVO:Evaluar el proceso de implementación de un informe operativo sinóptico.DISEÑO:Evaluación de procesos de métodos mixtos que incluyen encuestas y entrevistas cualitativas.AJUSTES:Prácticas de cirugía colorrectal en los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Veintiocho cirujanos colorrectales certificados por la junta.INTERVENCIONES:Implementación del informe operatorio sinóptico de cáncer de recto.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Aceptabilidad, viabilidad y usabilidad medidas por preguntas de encuestas tipo Likert y seguidas con entrevistas individuales para obtener experiencias con la implementación, así como motivaciones y barreras para el uso.RESULTADOS:Entre todos los participantes del estudio, 28 cirujanos completaron la encuesta electrónica (tasa de respuesta del 76%) y 21 (57%) completaron la entrevista telefónica. La usabilidad media fue 4,14 (rango = 1-5, error estándar (EE) = 0,15), la factibilidad media fue 3,90 (EE = 0,15) y la aceptabilidad fue 3,98 (EE = 0,18). Los participantes indicaron que se necesitaba un apoyo administrativo y técnico sustancial, pero que no siempre estaba disponible para la implementación y muchos se sintieron frustrados por la necesidad de cambiar su flujo de trabajo.LIMITACIONES:La mayoría de los cirujanos participantes eran hombres, blancos, tenían >12 años en la práctica y usaban sistemas de registros médicos electrónicos de Epic. Por lo tanto, es posible que no representen las perspectivas de todos los cirujanos de colon y recto de EE. UU. Además, a medida que el informe operativo sinóptico se implemente de manera más amplia en los EE. UU., Será importante considerar las variaciones en el proceso por sistema EMR.CONCLUSIONES:El informe quirúrgico sinóptico para el cáncer de recto fue en general fácil de implementar e incorporar en el flujo de trabajo, pero los cirujanos seguían preocupados por la carga adicional sin valor inmediato y tangible. A pesar de reconocer los beneficios, muchos participantes indicaron que solo implementaron el informe operativo sinóptico porque era un mandato del Programa Nacional de Acreditación para el Cáncer de Recto. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B735 (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

Technical Standards for Cancer Surgery: Improving Patient Care through Synoptic Operative Reporting

The Operative Standards for Cancer Surgery manuals define critical elements of optimal cancer surgery based on data and expert opinion. These key aspects of commonly performed cancer operations define technical standards that can be used as a quality assurance tool for practicing surgical oncologists and as an educational tool for trainees. This article provides background on these operative standards and their subsequent integration into synoptic operative report templates. With the goal of codifying the most important aspects of surgical oncology care to elevate and harmonize cancer care, the American College of Surgeons Cancer Programs has developed comprehensive synoptic operative reports. Synoptic operative reports are structured so that key data elements are recorded in a standardized format with prespecified terminology. In contrast to the narrative or structured operative reports frequently used by surgeons, these synoptic operative reports improve semantic clarity, provide uniform fields for abstraction, and facilitate passive data collection and real-time analytics while delivering key information for downstream multidisciplinary patient care. In this way, the synoptic operative report is a key component of a comprehensive effort to elevate the quality of cancer care nationally.

Development of consensus-derived quality indicators for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy operative reports

BACKGROUND

Synoptic operative reporting has been used as a solution to the poor quality of narrative reports. The aim of this study was to develop operative report quality indicators for the laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and to generate parameters by which these reports can be evaluated and improved.

METHODS

A Delphi protocol was used to determine quality indicators for LSG. Bariatric surgeons across Canada were recruited along with key physician stakeholders to participate via a secure web-based platform. Transferrable consensus items for LSG from previously developed Roux-en-Y gastric bypass operative indictors were put forward for consideration. Participants also initially submitted potential QIs. These were grouped by theme. Items were rated on 5-point Likert scales in subsequent rounds. Scores of 70% or higher were used for inclusion and 30% or less denoted exclusion. Elements scoring 30% to 70% agreement were recirculated by runoff in subsequent rounds to generate the final list of quality indicators.

RESULTS

Seven bariatric surgeons, representing all regions preforming LSG in Canada, were invited to participate in the Delphi group. Multidisciplinary invitees included one academic minimally invasive/acute care surgeon, one tertiary abdominal radiologist, and one academic gastroenterologist with bariatric expertise. Two rounds were required to achieve consensus. Both rounds achieved a 100% response (10/10). In round 1, forty items reached consensus. In Round 2, an additional 28 items reached consensus, with three items excluded, bringing the total number of quality indicators to 65.

CONCLUSION

This study establishes consensus-derived multidisciplinary quality indicators for LSG operative reports. Application of these findings aims to advance the quality and completeness of operative reporting in LSG in order to improve communication of important surgical details and quality measures to the multidisciplinary team involved in bariatric surgery care.

Implementation of a synoptic operative note for abdominal wall hernia repair: a statewide pilot evaluating completeness and communication of intraoperative details

Background

Variable approaches to intraoperative communication impede our understanding of surgical decision-making and best practices. This is critical among hernia repairs, where improved outcomes are reliant on understanding the impact of different patient characteristics and surgical approaches. In this context, a hernia-specific synoptic operative note was piloted as part of an effort to create a statewide hernia registry. We aimed to understand the impact of the synoptic operative note on variable missingness and evaluate barriers and facilitators to improved intraoperative communication and note adoption.

Methods

In January 2020, the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) registry was expanded to capture hernia-specific intraoperative variables. A synoptic operative note for hernia repair was piloted at 8 hospitals. The primary outcome was change in hernia variable communication, measured by missingness. Using a sequential explanatory mixed-methods design, we performed semi-structured interviews with data abstractors (n = 4) and surgeons (n = 4) at 5 pilot sites to assess barriers and facilitators of implementation. Interviews were iteratively analyzed using content analysis with both deductive and inductive approaches.

Results

From January to June 2020, 870 hernia repairs were performed across 8 pilot and 53 control sites. Pilot sites had significantly less missingness for all hernia-specific variables. At pilot sites, 46% of notes were fully complete in regard to hernia variables, compared to 21% at control sites (p value < 0.001). While collection of intraoperative variables improved after synoptic note implementation, low note adoption was reported. Facilitators of improved variable collection were (1) communication with data abstractors and (2) stakeholder acknowledgment of widespread benefit, while barriers included (1) surgeon resistance to practice change, (2) EMR/technology, and (3) interruptions to communication and implementation.

Conclusion

This mixed-methods evaluation of a synoptic operative note implementation suggests that sustained communication, particularly with abstractors, was the most impactful intervention. Future implementation efforts may have improved effectiveness with interventions supplementary to surgeon-level direction.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00464-021-08614-8.

Repeat preoperative endoscopy after regional implementation of electronic synoptic endoscopy reporting: a retrospective comparative study

BACKGROUND

Repeat preoperative endoscopy is common for patients with colorectal neoplasms. This can result in treatment delays, patient discomfort, and risks of colonoscopy-related complications. Repeat preoperative endoscopy has been attributed to poor communication between endoscopists and surgeons. In January 2019, mandatory electronic synoptic reporting for endoscopy was implemented to include elements consistent with quality indicators proposed in national guidelines. The aim of the present study is to assess whether the repeat preoperative endoscopy rate for colorectal lesions changed following synoptic report implementation.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of 1690 consecutive patients who underwent elective surgical resection for colorectal neoplasms from January 2007 to June 2020 at a tertiary hospital in Canada. Patients who had an index endoscopy documented via synoptic report were compared to those reported via narrative report. Primary outcomes were rates of repeat preoperative endoscopy and inclusion of colonoscopy quality indicators: photo-documentation, tattoo placement, and bowel preparation score.

RESULTS

In total, 1429 patients who underwent elective colorectal resection for colorectal cancers or polyps between January 2007 and June 2020 were included. 115 had index endoscopies recorded via synoptic report and 1314 by narrative report. The repeat preoperative endoscopy rate after endoscopies documented by narrative report was 29.07% (95% CI 26.63-31.61) and 25.22% (95% CI 17.58-34.17%) for synoptic report. Patients whose index endoscopies where performed by a practitioner other than their operating surgeon had a re-endoscopy rate of 36.03% (95% CI 32.82-39.33%) after narrative report and 38.81% (95% CI 27.14-51.50%) for synoptic report. Rates of tattoo placement, photo-documentation, and reporting of bowel preparation quality were all significantly increased with synoptic reports (p ≤ 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopy synoptic reports based on current guidelines were not associated with a decrease in rates of repeat pre-operative endoscopy at a high-volume colorectal cancer centre. Future study should examine guideline deficiencies for this purpose and make necessary modifications.

Implementation of a Synoptic Operative Report for Rectal Cancer: A Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

The National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer is a collaborative effort to improve the quality of rectal cancer care, including multidisciplinary assessment, treatment planning, and documentation using synoptic radiology, pathology, and operative reports.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to examine the implementation and use of a synoptic operative report for rectal cancer.

DESIGN

This was a convergent mixed-methods implementation study of electronic medical record data, surveys, and qualitative interviews.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at US medical centers.

PARTICIPANTS

Colorectal surgeons were included.

INTERVENTION

After development, the synoptic operative report was iteratively revised and ultimately approved by the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Executive Council and the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer and then implemented into participants' institutional electronic medical record systems.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Change in fidelity to documentation of 19 critical items after implementation of synoptic reports and in-depth details and perspectives about the synoptic operative report were measured.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven surgeons from 14 institutions submitted preimplementation operative reports (n = 180); 32 of 37 surgeons submitted postimplementation reports (n = 118). The operation type, approach, and formation of a stoma were present in >70% of preimplementation reports; however, the location of the tumor, the type of reconstruction, and the distal margin were reported in <50%. Each item was present in ≥89% of postimplementation reports. Twenty eight of 37 participants completed the survey, and 21 of 37 participants completed qualitative interviews. Emergent themes included concerns for additional burden and time constraints using the synoptic report themselves, as well as errors or absent information in traditional narrative operative reports of other surgeons.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its sample size, cross-sectional nature, specialized centers, and inclusion of colorectal surgeons only.

CONCLUSIONS

Although fidelity to the 19 items substantially increased after implementation of the synoptic report, reactions to the synoptic report varied among surgeons. Many indicated concerns that it would hinder workflow or add extra time burden. Others felt the synoptic report could indirectly improve rectal cancer quality of care and provide useful data for quality improvement and research. More work is needed to update and improve the synoptic operative report and streamline the workflow. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B100. IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE UN INFORME OPERATIVO SINÓPTICO PARA EL CÁNCER DE RECTO: UN ESTUDIO UTILIZANDO MÉTODOS MIXTOS: El Programa Nacional de Acreditación para el Cáncer Rectal es una iniciativa de colaboración para mejorar la calidad de la atención del cáncer rectal, utilizando evaluación multidisciplinaria, planificación del tratamiento y documentación mediante radiología sinóptica, patología e informes quirúrgicos.Examinar la implementación y el uso de un informe operativo sinóptico para el cáncer de recto.Estudio de implementación de métodos mixtos convergentes de datos de registros médicos electrónicos, encuestas y entrevistas cualitativas.Centros médicos de los Estados Unidos.Cirujanos colorrectales.Después de su formulación, el informe operativo sinóptico fue revisado de forma iterativa y finalmente aprobado por el Consejo Ejecutivo de la Sociedad Americana de Cirujanos de Colon y Rectal y el Programa Nacional de Acreditación para el Cáncer Rectal. Posteriormente, se implementó en los sistemas de registros médicos electrónicos institucionales de los participantes.Cambios en la precisión de documentación de 19 ítems críticos después de la implementación de informes sinópticos; Revisión de detalles y perspectivas en a profundidad sobre el informe operativo sinóptico.Treinta y siete cirujanos de 14 instituciones presentaron informes operativos previos a la implementación (n = 180); 32/37 cirujanos presentaron informes posteriores a la implementación (n = 118). El tipo de operación, el enfoque y la formación de un estoma estuvieron presentes en > 70% de los informes previos a la implementación; sin embargo, la ubicación del tumor, el tipo de reconstrucción y el margen distal se informaron en <50%. Cada ítem estuvo presente en > 89% de los informes posteriores a la implementación. 28/37 participantes completaron la encuesta y 21/37 participantes completaron entrevistas cualitativas. Los temas emergentes incluyeron preocupaciones por la carga adicional y las limitaciones de tiempo usando el informe sinóptico en sí, y errores o información ausente en los informes operativos narrativos tradicionales de otros cirujanos.Tamaño de la muestra, estudio transversal, centros especializados, cirujanos colorrectales solamente.Aunque la fidelidad a los 19 ítems aumentó sustancialmente después de la implementación del informe sinóptico, las reacciones al informe sinóptico variaron entre los cirujanos. Muchos indicaron preocupaciones de que obstaculizaría el flujo de trabajo o agregaría una carga de tiempo adicional. Otros consideraron que el informe sinóptico podría mejorar indirectamente la calidad de la atención del cáncer de recto y proporcionar datos útiles para la mejora de la calidad y la investigación. Se necesita más trabajo para actualizar y mejorar el informe operativo sinóptico y agilizar el flujo de trabajo. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B100. (Traducción-Dr. Adrian E. Ortega).

Completeness of operative reports for rectal cancer surgery

INTRODUCTION

Synoptic operative reporting has been shown to improve completeness and consistency in surgical documentation. We sought to determine whether operative reports contain the key elements recommended by the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer.

METHODS

Rectal cancer operative reports from June-December 2018 were submitted from ten hospitals in Michigan. These reports were analyzed to identify key elements in the synoptic operative template and assessed for completeness.

RESULTS

In total, 110 operative reports were reviewed. Thirty-one (28%) reports contained all 24 elements; all of these reports used a synoptic template. Overall, 62 (56%) reports used a synoptic template and 48 (44%) did not. Using a synoptic template significantly improved documentation, as these reports contained 92% of required elements, compared to 39% for narrative reports (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION

Narrative operative reports inconsistently document rectal cancer resection. This study provides evidence that synoptic reporting will improve quality of documentation for rectal cancer surgery.