Preferences for bariatric surgery: comparing surgeons and patients using a discrete choice experiment

Understanding preferences of patients with obesity for metabolic bariatric surgery: a comprehensive adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis

BACKGROUND

Patient preferences toward metabolic bariatric surgery (MBS) remain inadequately explored.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to identify and analyze the key factors influencing the decision-making process of patients considering MBS.

SETTING

The research was conducted at the metabolic bariatric surgery clinic of the Medical Research Institute Hospital, Alexandria University, Egypt.

METHOD

Patients with obesity were recruited at the clinic before MBS. The surgical profiles were characterized by attributes including treatment method, recovery and reversibility, treatment tenure, expected weight loss, impact on associated medical problems, risk of complication, side effects, dietary changes, and out-of-pocket costs. Patients engaged in an online survey comprising sociodemographic data, Build Your Own (BYO) section, screening section, and choice tournament section. Adaptive choice-based conjoint analysis was employed to discern the preferences.

RESULTS

Of the 299 respondents, the surgical profiles with the highest preference involved a loss of 80% of excess weight without any recurrence (14.67 [95% CI, 14.10-15.23]), 0% risk of complication (13.74 [95% CI, 13.03-14.45]), and absence of adverse effects (11.32 [95% CI, 10.73-11.91]). K-mean cluster analysis identified 2 distinct groups: "patients prioritize weight loss" group prioritized excess weight loss, surgery availability, and diet change, whereas "patients prioritize avoidance of complications" group focused on the risk of complication, adverse effects, and the surgery mechanism.

CONCLUSIONS

MBS candidates predominantly value weight loss without recurrence, followed by minimization of complication risks and adverse effects, within 3 years postsurgery. Conversely, initial out-of-pocket costs and resolution of medical conditions were deemed the least influential attributes.

Outcomes of SADI and OAGB Compared to RYGB from the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Quality Improvement Program: The North American Experience

BACKGROUND

Rapid adoption of sleeve gastrectomy (SG) in the last decade aptly reflects the desire of patients and surgeons for alternatives to RYGB and DS. While SG provides good outcomes, other options that address specific patient needs are warranted. Recently approved by ASMBS, SADI, and OAGB have garnered increasing interest due to their single anastomosis technique.

METHODS

Using the Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Quality Improvement Program database, we examined laparoscopic and robotic cases from 2018 to 2021 to understand the percentage of primary bariatric surgery cases that are SADI and OAGB. We used coarsened exact matching to match patients who underwent SADI or OAGB to patients who underwent Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). We examined outcomes of matched patients using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 667,979 patients that underwent bariatric-metabolic surgery, 1326 (0.2%) underwent SADI, and 2541 (0.4%) underwent OAGB. SADI was not identified in the database until 2020. In 2020, there were 487 SADI procedures compared to 839 in 2021. From 2018 to 2021, OAGBs went from 149 to 940. Compared with RYGB, SADI was associated with higher rates of anastomotic or staple line leak (OR 2.21 (95% CI 1.08-4.53)) and sepsis (OR 3.62 (95% CI 1.62-8.12)). Compared with RYGB, OAGB was associated with lower rates of gastrointestinal bleeding (OR 0.29 (95% CI 0.12-0.71)) and bowel obstruction (OR 0.10 (95% CI 0.02-0.39)). Of note, there were no differences between these procedures and RYGB for 30-day mortality.

CONCLUSION

More SADIs and OAGBs are being performed. However, there were higher complication rates associated with the SADI procedure. Further studies will be needed to better understand the key drivers for these outcomes.

Preferences and Willingness to Pay for Medication in Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma in China: A Discrete-Choice Experiment

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to assess the relative importance of attributes and the willingness to pay for pharmacological therapies among patients with renal cell carcinoma in China.

METHODS

Patients with renal cell carcinoma completed a D-efficient-designed, discrete-choice experiment online survey that presented a series of ten trade-off questions and one examining scenario. Based on the literature review and consultations with patients with renal cell carcinoma and clinicians, each question included a pair of hypothetical renal cell carcinoma medication profiles characterized by seven attributes including progression-free survival, objective response rate, medication regimen, fatigue, gastrointestinal reaction, hand-foot syndrome, and monthly out-of-pocket costs. Relative importance and willingness to pay were calculated using coefficients estimated by mixed logit regression in the main analysis. Subgroup analyses were conducted considering the heterogeneity of the participants, based on sex, education level, and income level, using conditional logit regression.

RESULTS

The analysis incorporated responses from 182 Chinese respondents. Except for the medication regimen, all attributes were statistically significant. Progression-free survival was the most important attribute, followed by objective response rate, monthly out-of-pocket costs, fatigue, gastrointestinal reaction, and hand-foot syndrome. Patients were willing to pay ￥2010.51 ($298.30), ￥494.93 ($73.43) for 1 unit improvement of progression-free survival, and objective response rate, and￥7558.93 ($1121.50), ￥6927.24 ($1027.78) to avoid experiencing fatigue and gastrointestinal reaction, respectively. Differences in preferences and willingness to pay were found according to patients' gender, income, and education level.

CONCLUSIONS

In China, patients with renal cell carcinoma preferred medications with better efficacy (objective response rate and progression-free survival) and lower out-of-pocket costs. Heterogeneity can be found in preferences and willingness to pay based on patients' gender, income, and education levels.

Surgeon behaviors related to engaging patients in smoking cessation at the time of elective surgery

BACKGROUND

Despite the abundance of evidence supporting smoking cessation before elective surgery, there is wide variation in surgeon adherence to these best practices.

METHODS

This qualitative study used convenience sampling to recruit General Surgery trained surgeons. Surgeons participated in semi-structured interviews based on domains from the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF). Content analysis was guided by the TDF.

RESULTS

Of the 14 TDF domains, social or professional role/identity, memory, attention and decision processes, environmental context and resources, and beliefs about consequences emerged most frequently. Mapping these domains to the Behavior Change Wheel identified education, enablement, and incentivization as effective intervention functions.

CONCLUSIONS

Using the TDF, this study identified a widespread sense of responsibility among surgeons to engage patients in perioperative smoking cessation despite workplace barriers and lacking resources. These findings provide valuable insight to facilitate surgeon participation in health promotion through targeted, theory-based interventions informed by surgeon identified barriers to perioperative smoking cessation.

Polygenic Risk Prediction in Diverticulitis

OBJECTIVE

To derive and validate a polygenic risk score (PRS) to predict the occurrence and severity of diverticulitis and to understand the potential for incorporation of a PRS in current decision-making.

BACKGROUND

PRS quantifies genetic variation into a continuous measure of risk. There is a need for improved risk stratification to guide surgical decision-making that could be fulfilled by PRS. It is unknown how surgeons might integrate PRS in decision-making.

METHODS

We derived a PRS with 44 single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with diverticular disease in the UK Biobank and validated this score in the Michigan Genomics Initiative (MGI). We performed a discrete choice experiment of practicing colorectal surgeons. Surgeons rated the influence of clinical factors and a hypothetical polygenic risk prediction tool.

RESULTS

Among 2812 MGI participants with diverticular disease, 1964 were asymptomatic, 574 had mild disease, and 274 had severe disease. PRS was associated with occurrence and severity. Patients in the highest PRS decile were more likely to have diverticulitis [odds ratio (OR)=1.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.42-2.38)] and more likely to have severe diverticulitis (OR=1.61; 95% CI, 1.04-2.51) than the bottom 50%. Among 213 surveyed surgeons, extreme disease-specific factors had the largest utility (3 episodes in the last year, +74.4; percutaneous drain, + 69.4). Factors with strongest influence against surgery included 1 lifetime episode (-63.3), outpatient management (-54.9), and patient preference (-39.6). PRS was predicted to have high utility (+71).

CONCLUSIONS

A PRS derived from a large national biobank was externally validated, and found to be associated with the incidence and severity of diverticulitis. Surgeons have clear guidance at clinical extremes, but demonstrate equipoise in intermediate scenarios. Surgeons are receptive to PRS, which may be most useful in marginal clinical situations. Given the current lack of accurate prognostication in recurrent diverticulitis, PRS may provide a novel approach for improving patient counseling and decision-making.

Identifying barriers to shared decision-making about bariatric surgery in two large health systems

OBJECTIVE

Prior research suggests shared decision-making (SDM) could improve patient and health care provider communication about bariatric surgery. The aim of this work was to identify and prioritize barriers to SDM around bariatric surgery to help guide implementation of SDM.

METHODS

Two large US health care systems formed multidisciplinary teams to facilitate the implementation of SDM around bariatric surgery. The teams used a nominal group process approach involving (1) generation of multilevel barriers, (2) round-robin recording of barriers, (3) facilitated discussion, and (4) selection and ranking of barriers according to importance and feasibility to address.

RESULTS

One health system identified 13 barriers and prioritized 5 as the most important and feasible to address. The second health system identified 14 barriers and prioritized 6. Both health systems commonly prioritized six barriers: lack of insurance coverage; lack of understanding of insurance coverage; lack of organizational prioritization of SDM; lack of knowledge about bariatric surgery; lack of interdepartmental clarity between primary and specialty care; and limited training on SDM conversations and tools.

CONCLUSIONS

Health systems face numerous barriers to SDM around bariatric surgery, and these can be easily identified and prioritized by multistakeholder teams. Future research should seek to identify effective strategies to address these common barriers.

Obesity surgery: Which procedure should we choose and why?

In the 70years that bariatric surgery has existed, many different surgical procedures have been developed. Four procedures are officially accepted by all learned societies: adjustable gastric banding (AGB), sleeve gastrectomy (SG), Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and bilio-pancreatic diversion (BPD). Gastric banding has the lowest short-term surgical risk, but it has the highest re-operation rate. Compared to SG, RYGB presents about twice the risk of early complications. Late complications seem equivalent between the two procedures but studies with follow-up>10years are rarer for SG. SG has become the most commonly performed bariatric procedure worldwide, followed by RYGB, which is still the standard. BPD remains very marginal but the omega gastric bypass, an alternative technique that is still under evaluation, now competes with RYGB. The effectiveness of these different procedures on weight loss remains difficult to compare. SG and RYGB seem to be equivalent for weight loss results and remission of type-2 diabetes (T2DM). Their results are superior to AGB. Procedures that result in greater lengths of intestinal bypass (bilio-pancreatic diversion, omega bypass) seem to have a greater weight-loss effect but are burdened by more side effects. In conclusion, the choice of a procedure is conditioned firstly by the benefit-risk ratio and in relation to patient-related parameters, particularly the body mass index (BMI) and co-morbidities. Long-term results are also linked to factors other than surgery and in particular patient behavioral factors. Obesity is a chronic disease that indicates the need for real long-term medical and surgical management.

Comparison of early post-operative complications in primary and revisional laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, gastric bypass, and duodenal switch MBSAQIP-reported cases from 2015 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is now the most performed bariatric surgery, though gastric bypass (GB) and duodenal switch (DS) remain common, especially as conversion/revision (C/R) procedures. This analysis compared early postoperative outcomes of primary and C/R laparoscopic SG to DS and GB; and primary procedures of each vs C/R counterparts.

METHODS

The Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery Accreditation and Quality Improvement Program (MBSAQIP) dataset was queried for SG, GB, and DS cases from 2015 to 2019. Multivariable logistic regression calculated crude and adjusted odds ratios for surgical site infection (SSI), reoperation, and readmission at 30 days in two initial comparisons: (1) primary SG vs DS or GB and (2) C/R SG vs DS or GB. A secondary analysis compared primary GS, GB, or DS with C/R counterparts. Models were adjusted for confounding demographics and comorbidities.

RESULTS

Of 755,968 primary cases, most were SG (72.8%), followed by GB (26.3%), then DS (0.9%). Compared to SG, GB and DS demonstrated higher odds of SSI (aOR 3.02 [2.84, 3.2]), readmission (aOR 1.97 [1.92, 2.03]), and reoperation (aOR 2.74 [2.62, 2.86]), respectively. Of 68,716 C/R cases, SG was most common (43.2%), followed by GB (37.5%), then DS (19.2%). C/R GB and DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (aOR 2.28 [1.98, 2.62]), readmission (aOR 2.10 [1.94, 2.27]), and reoperation (aOR 2.3 [2.04, 2.59]) vs SG, respectively. C/R SG and DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (OR 2.09 [1.66, 2.63]; 1.63 [1.24, 2.14), readmission (OR 1.13 [1.02, 1.26]), and reoperation (OR 1.27 [1.06, 1.52]; 1.58 [1.24, 2.0]), vs primary procedures. C/R DS demonstrated greater risk of SSI (OR 1.23 [1.66, 2.63]).

CONCLUSIONS

Early complications are comparable between GB and DS, and greater than SG. In C/R procedures, GB and DS demonstrate greater risk than SG. Overall, C/R procedures demonstrate greater risk of most, but not all, early postoperative complications.

Laparoscopic single-layer running "trapezoid-shaped" suture versus mechanical stapling for esophagojejunostomy after total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: cost-effect analysis of propensity score-matched study cohorts

OBJECTIVES

Totally laparoscopic total gastrectomy has been developed with difficulty in intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy. Although mechanical stapling has been widely used for intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy, manual suture holds great promise with the emergence of high-resolution 3D vision and robotic surgery. After exploration of how to improve the safety and efficiency of intracorporeal suture for esophagojejunostomy, we recommended the technique of single-layer running "trapezoid-shaped" suture. The cost-effectiveness was analyzed by comparing with conventional mechanical stapling.

METHODS

The study retrospectively reviewed the patients undergoing laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer from January 2010 to December 2021. The patients were divided into two cohorts based on the methods of intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy: manual suture versus stapling suture. Propensity score matching was performed to match patients from the two cohorts at a ratio of 1:1. Then group comparison was made to determine whether manual suture was non-inferior to stapling suture in terms of operation time, anastomotic complications, postoperative hospital stay, and surgical cost.

RESULTS

The study included 582 patients with laparoscopic total gastrectomy. The manual and stapling suture for esophagojejunostomy were performed in 50 and 532 patients, respectively. In manual suture cohort, the median time for the whole operation and digestive tract reconstruction were 300 min and 110 min. There was no anastomotic bleeding and stenosis but two cases of anastomotic leak which occurred at 3 days after surgery. The median length of postoperative hospital stay was 11 days. After propensity score matching, group comparison yielded two variables with statistical significance: time for digestive tract reconstruction and surgery cost. The manual suture cohort spent less money but more time for esophagojejunostomy. Intriguingly, the learning curve of manual suture revealed that the time for digestive tract reconstruction was declined with accumulated number of operations.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic single-layer running "trapezoid-shaped" suture appears safe and cost-effective for intracorporeal esophagojejunostomy after total gastrectomy. Although the concern remains about prolonged operation time for beginners of performing the suture method, adequate practice is expected to shorten the operation time based on our learning curve analysis.

Modelling Stakeholder Valuation: An Example Using the Surgical Treatments for Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease

Background

Assessing the value of a treatment is of great importance. Typical methods are directed toward policy decisions. However, individual stakeholders will have different valuation based on their interests.

Methods

Formulas were developed to quantify the value of a treatment from the patient, surgeon, hospital, and private third-party payer. These formulas are based on observed factors that go into treatment decision-making for each stakeholder. Using the example of four surgical treatment options for gastroesophageal reflux disease, values for each factor were obtained from publically available documents or were arbitrarily estimated.

Results

From the patient perspective, the laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication (LNF) provided the best value at 2.99 quality-adjusted life years per $1,000 spent. From the surgeon perspective, it provided the best value at $752.20 earned per hour effort. From the hospital perspective, LNP provided the best value at $3,446 earned per episode of care. Lastly, from the third-party payer perspective, total incisionless fundoplication provided the best value at $13,336 per year.

Conclusions

Because value is measured differently for each stakeholder, there will be conflicts as to how treatment options are valued.