Dual surgeon operating to improve patient safety

The Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on Annual Review of Competency Progression Outcomes Issued to General Surgical Trainees

BACKGROUND

The Covid-19 pandemic had a profound impact on surgical training. In this longitudinal cohort study, we quantify the effects of the pandemic on United Kingdom (UK) surgeons in higher specialty training by analyzing the Annual Review of Competency Progression (ARCP) Outcomes issued to them prior to, and during, the pandemic.

METHODS

Anonymized records were provided from the UK training management system- the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme (ISCP)- on the ARCP Outcomes of higher specialty trainees in General Surgery over the period between January 2017 and December 2022. Demographic data including sex and age group on starting higher specialty training were considered, as were working pattern, phase of training during the height of the pandemic (2020 and 2021), and training region. The proportion of nonstandard outcomes, and the use of specific Covid-19 outcomes, were analyzed to assess the impact of these variables on ARCP outcome using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. Prepandemic outcomes in 2017 were used as a comparator.

RESULTS

A total of 7414 ARCP outcomes issued to 1874 General Surgery higher speciality trainees were analysed. The Adjusted Odds Ratio (AOR) for receiving a nonstandard outcome in 2020 (compared to 2017) was 3.07 (95% CI: 2.47-3.81, p < 0.001) not recovering to prepandemic levels by the end of 2022 (AOR 2.11 (95% CI: 1.69-2.64, p < 0.001)). Female sex (AOR 1.27 (95% CI: 1.13-1.43, p < 0.001) and being older on starting higher surgical training (AOR = 1.51 (95% CI: 1.34-1.70, p < 0.001) were both significantly associated with a higher chance of nonstandard outcome. Working pattern was linked to ARCP outcome on univariate analysis, but this relationship disappeared once corrected for other demographic factors (1.05, 95% CI: 0.88-1.24, p = 0.582). Being at a later stage of training during the pandemic was not linked to an increase in AOR of receiving a nonstandard outcome (1.09, 95% CI: 0.97-1.22, p = 0.134), but trainees receiving a nonstandard outcome in this group were more likely to have extra training time advised (15.49%, vs 4.27% in 2021). The highest AOR of receiving a Covid-19 outcome was in the Wessex Deanery at 2.85 (95% CI: 1.83-4.46, p < 0.001), whilst the lowest AOR were seen in Yorkshire and the Humber (0.32, 95% CI: 0.17-0.62, p < 0.001). Removing Covid-19 specific outcomes from the analysis shows a continued rise in the use of nonstandard outcomes in all years except 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

The Covid-19 Pandemic had a significant impact on the trajectory of training in General Surgery in the UK. Training extensions were more likely to be recommended later in training. There was considerable variation in the use of Covid-19 ARCP outcomes across the UK. There is ongoing evidence of differential attainment at ARCP in General Surgery, with female trainees and older graduates having greater chances of nonstandard outcomes. The underlying reasons for these associations need to be explored. Efforts to urgently address deficits in training post Covid-19 with an awareness of the intersectional nature of differential attainment are needed.

The Value of a Co-surgeon in Microvascular Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Using a co-surgeon model has been suggested to improve perioperative outcomes and reduce the risk of complications. Therefore, we evaluated if a co-surgeon model compared with a single microsurgeon model could decrease the surgical time, length of stay, rate of complications, and healthcare-associated costs in adult patients undergoing microvascular breast reconstruction (MBR). A comprehensive search was performed across PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. Studies evaluating the perioperative outcomes and complications of MBR using a single-surgeon model and co-surgeon model were included. A random-effects model was fitted to the data. Seven retrospective comparative studies were included. Ultimately, 1411 patients (48.23%) underwent MBR using a single-surgeon model, representing 2339 flaps (48.42%). On the other hand, 1514 patients (51.77%) underwent MBR using a co-surgeon model, representing 2492 flaps (51.58%). The surgical time was significantly reduced using a co-surgeon model in all studies compared with a single-surgeon model. The length of stay was reduced using a co-surgeon model compared with a single-surgeon model in all but one study. The log odds ratio (log-OR) of recipient site infection (log-OR = -0.227; P = 0.6509), wound disruption (log-OR = -0.012; P = 0.9735), hematoma (log-OR = 0.061; P = 0.8683), and seroma (log-OR = -0.742; P = 0.1106) did not significantly decrease with the incorporation of a co-surgeon compared with a single-surgeon model. Incorporating a co-surgeon model for MBR has minimal impact on the rates of surgical site complications compared with a single-surgeon model. However, a co-surgeon optimized efficacy and reduced the surgical time and length of stay.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Access to Cancer Surgery: Analysis of Surgical Wait Times in British Columbia, Canada

OBJECTIVE

As coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) spread, efforts were made to preserve resources for the anticipated surge of COVID-19 patients in British Columbia, Canada. However, the relationship between COVID-19 hospitalizations and access to cancer surgery is unclear. In this project, we analyze the impact of COVID-19 patient volumes on wait time for cancer surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study using population-based datasets of regional surgical wait times and COVID-19 patient volumes. Weekly median wait times for urgent, nonurgent, cancer, and noncancer surgeries, and maximum volumes of hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were studied. The results were qualitatively analyzed.

RESULTS

A sustained association between weekly median wait time for priority and other cancer surgeries and increase hospital COVID-19 patient volumes was not qualitatively discernable. In response to the first phase of COVID-19 patient volumes, relative to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels, wait time were shortened for urgent cancer surgery but increased for nonurgent surgeries. During the second phase, for all diagnostic groups, wait times returned to pre-COVID-19 pandemic levels. During the third phase, wait times for all surgeries increased.

CONCLUSION

Cancer surgery access may have been influenced by other factors, such as policy directives and local resource issues, independent of hospitalized COVID-19 patient volumes. The initial access limitations gradually improved with provincial and institutional resilience, and vaccine rollout.

Do we need a co-pilot in the operating theatre? A cross-sectional study on surgeons' perceptions

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this original study was to investigate general surgeons' perceptions on the role of dual surgeon operating for high-risk, elective complex surgical procedures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A 21-part cross-sectional online survey was self-completed by 85 general surgeons across hospitals in the UK. The survey assessed the perception of dual surgeon operating on patient morbidity and mortality, surgeons' burnout rates, complaints, patient waiting times and overall trainee experience. Statistical analysis was performed using R version 3.6.1.

RESULTS

Overall 78.8% believed that dual surgeon operating could help to overcome these human factors. Sub-analysis includes improve surgeon fatigue (89.4%), improve confidence (83.5%), improve decision-making (76.5%), minimise technical error (69.4%), improve communication, team work and leadership skills (65.9%). 65.9% believed it would reduce surgeons' burnout. There was a statistically significant relationship between the participants believing it would reduce surgeons' burnout and those who felt it would reduce complaints, Chi-squared(4) = [30.8], p = [0.00000342]. A statistically significant relationship was noted between participants believing it would reduce surgeons' burnout and those who felt it would reduce patient mortality/morbidity, Chi-squared(4) = [19.9], p = [0.000517].

CONCLUSION

The survey has highlighted positive surgeons' perceptions regarding dual surgeon operating.

Bariatric surgery provision in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: retrospective cohort study of a national registry

BACKGROUND

When surgery resumed following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, guidelines recommended the prioritization of patients with greater obesity-related co-morbidities and/or higher body mass index.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to record the effect of the pandemic on total number, patient demographics, and perioperative outcomes of elective bariatric surgery patients in the United Kingdom.

SETTING AND METHODS

The United Kingdom National Bariatric Surgical Registry was used to identify patients who underwent elective bariatric surgery during the pandemic (1 yr from April 1, 2020). Characteristics of this group were compared with those of a pre-pandemic cohort. Primary outcomes were case volume, case mix, and providers. National Health Service cases were analyzed for baseline health status and perioperative outcomes. Fisher exact, χ2, and Student t tests were used as appropriate.

RESULTS

The total number of cases decreased to one third of pre-pandemic volume (8615 to 2930). The decrease in operating volume varied, with 36 hospitals (45%) experiencing a 75%-100% reduction. Cases performed in the National Health Service fell from 74% to 53% (P < .0001). There was no change in baseline body mass index (45.2 ± 8.3 kg/m2 from 45.5 ± 8.3 kg/m2; P = .23) or prevalence of type 2 diabetes (26% from 26%; P = .99). Length of stay (median 2 d) and surgical complication rate (1.4% from 2.0%; relative risk = .71; 95% CI .45-1.12; P = .13) were unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of a dramatic reduction in elective bariatric surgery due to the COVID-19 pandemic, patients with more severe co-morbidities were not prioritized for surgery. These findings should inform preparation for future crises.

Advances and Evolving Challenges in Spinal Deformity Surgery

BACKGROUND

Surgical intervention is a critical tool to address adult spinal deformity (ASD). Given the evolution of spinal surgical techniques, we sought to characterize developments in ASD correction and barriers impacting clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a literature review utilizing PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to examine advances in ASD surgical correction and ongoing challenges from patient and clinician perspectives. ASD procedures were examined across pre-, intra-, and post-operative phases.

RESULTS

Several factors influence the effectiveness of ASD correction. Standardized radiographic parameters and three-dimensional modeling have been used to guide operative planning. Complex minimally invasive procedures, targeted corrections, and staged procedures can tailor surgical approaches while minimizing operative time. Further, improvements in osteotomy technique, intraoperative navigation, and enhanced hardware have increased patient safety. However, challenges remain. Variability in patient selection and deformity undercorrection have resulted in heterogenous clinical responses. Surgical complications, including blood loss, infection, hardware failure, proximal junction kyphosis/failure, and pseudarthroses, pose barriers. Although minimally invasive approaches are being utilized more often, clinical validation is needed.

CONCLUSIONS

The growing prevalence of ASD requires surgical solutions that can lead to sustained symptom resolution. Leveraging computational and imaging advances will be necessary as we seek to provide comprehensive treatment plans for patients.

"It's making me think outside the box at times": a qualitative study of dynamic capabilities in surgical training

Craft specialties such as surgery endured widespread disruption to postgraduate education and training during the pandemic. Despite the expansive literature on rapid adaptations and innovations, generalisability of these descriptions is limited by scarce use of theory-driven methods. In this research, we explored UK surgical trainees' (n = 46) and consultant surgeons' (trainers, n = 25) perceptions of how learning in clinical environments changed during a time of extreme uncertainty (2020/2021). Our ultimate goal was to identify new ideas that could shape post-pandemic surgical training. We conducted semi-structured virtual interviews with participants from a range of working/training environments across thirteen Health Boards in Scotland. Initial analysis of interview transcripts was inductive. Dynamic capabilities theory (how effectively an organisation uses its resources to respond to environmental changes) and its micro-foundations (sensing, seizing, reconfiguring) were used for subsequent theory-driven analysis. Findings demonstrate that surgical training responded dynamically and adapted to external and internal environmental uncertainty. Sensing threats and opportunities in the clinical environment prompted trainers' institutions to seize new ways of working. Learners gained from reconfigured training opportunities (e.g., splitting operative cases between trainees), pan-surgical working (e.g., broader surgical exposure), redeployment (e.g., to medical specialties), collaborative working (working with new colleagues and in new ways) and supervision (shifting to online supervision). Our data foreground the human resource and structural reconfigurations, and technological innovations that effectively maintained surgical training during the pandemic, albeit in different ways. These adaptations and innovations could provide the foundations for enhancing surgical education and training in the post-pandemic era.

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgery for severe endometriosis in the UK: a national database study

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant effect on healthcare services, particularly affecting patients who suffer from chronic conditions. However, the pandemic's effect on endometriosis surgery is not yet known.

Objectives

To determine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgery for severe endometriosis in the UK at a national, regional and centre-level.

Materials and Methods

The British Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (BSGE) collects data nationally on all operations for severe endometriosis which involve dissection of the pararectal space. Annual audits of this database were obtained from the BSGE. Publicly available data on COVID-19 cases and population were obtained from the UK Office for National Statistics.

Main outcome measures

Numbers of annual BSGE-registered endometriosis operations.

Results

A total of 8204 operations were performed. The number of operations decreased by 49.4% between 2019 and 2020 and then increased in 2021, but remained 10.5% below average pre-pandemic levels, indicating at least 980 missed operations between 2019-2020. Median operations per centre decreased by 51.0% in 2020 (IQR 29.4% - 75.0%) and increased in 2021 but remained 33% below pre-pandemic levels. There was no change in the type of surgery performed. All 11 administrative regions of Great Britain had reduced numbers of operations in 2020 compared with the average for 2017-2019, with a median 44.2% decrease (range 13.3% - 67.5%). Regional reduction in operations was correlated with COVID-19 infection rates (r=0.54, 95% CI of r 0.022 - 1.00, p=0.043).

Conclusion

The number of operations performed annually in the UK for severe endometriosis fell dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic and is yet to normalise.

What's new?

This study shows the dramatic effect that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on UK services for endometriosis surgery, which may continue to affect patients and clinicians for a considerable time to come.

Effect of surgeon volume on pediatric thyroid surgery outcomes: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pediatric thyroidectomy has been identified as a surgical procedure that may benefit from concentrating cases to high-volume surgeons. This systematic review aimed to address the definition of "high-volume surgeon" for pediatric thyroidectomy and to examine the relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and OpenGrey databases were searched for through February 2020 for studies which reported on pediatric thyroidectomy and specified surgeon volume and surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

Ten studies, encompassing 6430 patients, were included in the review. Five single-center retrospective studies reported only on high-volume surgeons, one single center retrospective study reported on only low-volume surgeons, and four national database studies (2 cross sectional, 2 retrospective reviews) reported outcomes for both high-volume and low-volume surgeons. Majority of patients underwent total thyroidectomy (54.9%); common indications for surgery were malignancy (41.7%) and hyperthyroidism/thyroiditis (40.5%). Rates of transient hypocalcemia (11.4% - 74.2%), transient recurrent laryngeal nerve injury (0% - 9.7%), and bleeding (0.5% - 4.3%) varied across studies. Definitions for high-volume pediatric thyroid surgeons ranged from ≥9 annual pediatric thyroid operations to >200 annual thyroid operations (with >30 pediatric cases). Four studies reported significantly better outcomes, including lower post-operative complications and shorter length of hospital stay, for patients treated by high-volume surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite significant variation in caseloads to define volume, pediatric thyroid patients have generally better outcomes when operated on by higher volume surgeons. Concentration thyroidectomy cases to a smaller cohort of surgeons within pediatric practices may confer improved outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; Level IV.

The benefits of dual-consultant operating in complex breast reconstruction: A retrospective cohort comparison study

BACKGROUND

Dual-consultant operating (DCO) has been introduced in a multitude of surgical specialities. This retrospective cohort comparison study seeks to delineate any benefits DCO may confer on list utilisation, patient safety and training opportunities.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort comparison of all free-flap breast reconstruction cases conducted at a single centre by five consultant plastic surgeons in the period May 2016-May 2020.

RESULTS

A total of 281 patient records were used for analysis; 146 cases were dual consultants compared with 135 single consultants, representing 186 and 158 free flaps, respectively. Patient demographics were near identical in terms of patient age, BMI and ASA grade. Operating times were significantly reduced for both unilateral (mean reduction 59.49 min) and bilateral cases (mean reduction 38.14 min) with the presence of dual consultants. The mean length of stay for dual-consultant cases was on average 0.35 days less than for single consultant cases (p = 0.04). Dual-consultant case complications were less severe than those of single consultant cases (mean Clavien-Dindo severity 1.35 vs 0.96, p = 0.05). The rates of trainee one-to-one consultant training were increased in dual-consultant cases when preparing vessels (0.08 vs 0.35, p=<0.01) and performing anastomosis (0.63 vs 0.77, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

DCO for complex breast reconstruction confers significant benefits to operating time, list utility and patient safety whilst protecting training opportunities for trainees. Plastic surgery departments looking to redesign services in the post-SARS-CoV-19 era should consider its adoption into their enhanced recovery protocols.