Systematic review and meta-analysis comparing perioperative outcomes of emergency appendectomy performed by trainee vs trained surgeon

Internal and external factors affecting the performance score of surgical trainees doing laparoscopic appendectomy: a prospective, observational cohort study in a structured training programme

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic appendectomy is a common procedure and introduced early in general surgical training. How internal (i.e. surgeon's experience) or external (i.e. disease severity) may affect procedure performance is not well-studied. The aim of this study was to evaluate factors that may have an influence on the performance scores for surgical trainees.

METHODS

A prospective, observational cohort study of laparoscopic appendectomies performed by surgical trainees (experience < 4 years) operating under supervision. Trainers evaluated trainees' overall performance on a 6-point scale for proficiency. Perioperative data were recorded, including appendicitis severity, operating time and the overall difficulty of the procedure as assessed by the trainer. A "Challenging" procedure was defined as a combination of either/or "perforation" and "difficult". Trainees who had performed > 30 appendectomies were defined as "experienced". The trainees were asked if they had used simulation or web-based tools the week prior to surgery.

RESULTS

142 procedure evaluation forms were included of which 19 (13%) were "perforated", 14 (10%) "difficult" and 24 (17%) "Challenging". Perforated appendicitis was strongly associated with procedure difficulty (OR 21.2, 95% CI 6.0-75.6). Experienced trainees performed "proficient" more often than non-experienced (OR 34.5, 95% CI 6.8-176.5). "Difficult" procedures were inversely associated with proficiency (OR 0.1, 95% CI 0.0-0.9). In "Challenging" procedures, identifying the appendix had lowest proficiency (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1-0.9). The procedures assessed as "difficult" had significantly longer operating time with a median (IQR) of 90 (75-100) min compared to 59 (25-120) min for the non-difficult (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Both internal and external factors contribute to the performance score. Perforated appendicitis, technical difficult procedures and trainee experience all play a role, but a "difficult" procedure had most overall impact on proficiency evaluation.

The impact of an anesthesia residency teaching service on anesthesia-controlled time and postsurgical patient outcomes: a retrospective observational study on 15,084 surgical cases

BACKGROUND

Limited data exists regarding the impact of anesthesia residents on operating room efficiency and patient safety outcomes. This investigation hypothesized that supervised anesthesiology residents do not increase anesthesia-controlled or prolonged extubation times compared to supervised certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNA)/certified anesthesiologist assistants (CAA) or anesthesiologists working independently. Secondary objectives included differences in critical outcomes such as intraoperative hypotension, cardiac and pulmonary complications, acute kidney injury, and mortality.

METHODS

This retrospective single-center 24-month (January 1, 2020- December 31, 2021) cohort focused on primary outcomes of anesthesia-controlled times and prolonged extubation (>15 min) with additional assessment of secondary patient outcomes in adult patients having general anesthesia with an endotracheal tube or laryngeal mask airway for elective non-cardiac surgery. The study excluded sedation, obstetric, endoscopic, ophthalmology, and non-operating room procedures. Procedures were divided into three groups: anesthesiologists working solo, anesthesiologists supervising residents, or anesthesiologists supervising CRNA/CAAs. After univariate analysis, multivariable models were constructed to control for the univariate cofactor differences in the primary and secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 15,084 surgical cases met the inclusion criteria for this study for the three different care models: solo anesthesiologists (1,204 cases), anesthesiologist/resident pairing (3,146 cases), and anesthesiologist/CRNA/CAA (14,040 cases). Before multivariate analysis, the resident group exhibited longer anesthesia-controlled times (median, [interquartile range], 26.1 [21.7-32.0], p < 0.001), compared to CRNA/CAA (23.9 [19.7-29.5]), and attending-only surgical cases (21.0 [17.9-25.4]). After adjusting for covariates in a general linear regression model (age, BMI, ASA classification, comorbidities, arterial line insertion, surgical service, and surgical location), there were no significant differences in the anesthesia-controlled times between the provider groups. Prolonged extubation times (>15 min) were significantly less common in the anesthesiologist-only group compared to the other groups (p < 0.001). Despite these time differences, there were no clinically significant differences among the groups in postoperative pulmonary or cardiac complications, renal impairment, or the 30-day mortality rate of patients.

CONCLUSION

Anesthesia residents do not increase anesthesia-controlled operating room times or adversely affect clinically relevant patient outcomes compared to anesthesiologists working independently or supervising certified registered nurse anesthetists or certified anesthesiologist assistants.