Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program (SCOAP): A Nuanced, Flexible Platform for Colorectal Surgical Research

How to use communities of practice to support change in learning health systems: A landscape of roles and guidance for management

Background

Communities of practice support evidence-based practice and can be, in and of themselves, applied learning spaces in organizations. However, the variety of ways that communities of practice can support learning health systems are poorly characterized. Furthermore, health system leaders have little guidance on designing and resourcing communities of practice to effectively serve learning health systems.

Methods

We conducted a collective case study, examining a cross-section of Canadian-based communities of practice dedicated to supporting evidence-based practice. We held semi-structured interviews with 21 participants representing 16 communities of practice and 5 community of practice facilitation platforms that provide administration support, tools, and oversight for multiple communities of practice. Using the Conceptual Framework for Value-Creating Learning Health Systems, we characterized the numerous roles that communities of practice can take to support learning health systems. We also pulled insights from the interviews on properly resourcing and managing communities of practice.

Results

Communities of practice can advance learning health systems across learning cycles (ie, identifying learning priorities, generating data and knowledge, and implementing and evaluating change). They also act as important infrastructure required to share and coordinate across learning health systems. Community of practice facilitation platforms reduce staff members' workload, in turn, creating greater efficiency and effectiveness across community of practice lifespans. Furthermore, these platforms can be a mechanism to coordinate critical activities (e.g., priority alignment, knowledge brokerage/sharing across the broader system).

Conclusion

To the authors' knowledge, this is the first study to characterize communities of practice across the learning health system landscape. With these results, learning health system leaders have a catalog that clarifies the potential communities of practice roles in knowledge generation, implementation, and uptake of new evidence. Furthermore, the results provide evidence that organizational investment in overarching community of practice facilitation platforms will strengthen and accelerate community of practice supports in learning health systems.

The Impact of Prolonged Operative Time Associated With Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery: A Report From the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program

BACKGROUND

Increased operative time in colorectal surgery is associated with worse surgical outcomes. Laparoscopic and robotic operations have improved outcomes, despite longer operative times. Furthermore, the definition of "prolonged" operative time has not been consistently defined.

OBJECTIVE

The first objective was to define prolonged operative time across multiple colorectal operations and surgical approaches. The second was to describe the impact of prolonged operative time on length of stay and short-term outcomes.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Forty-two hospitals in the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program from 2011 to 2019.

PATIENTS

There were a total of 23,098 adult patients (age 18 years or older) undergoing 6 common, elective colorectal operations: right colectomy, left/sigmoid colectomy, total colectomy, low anterior resection, IPAA, or abdominoperineal resection.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Prolonged operative time defined as the 75th quartile of operative times for each operation and approach. Outcomes were length of stay, discharge home, and complications. Adjusted models were used to account for factors that could impact operative time and outcomes across the strata of open and minimally invasive approaches.

RESULTS

Prolonged operative time was associated with longer median length of stay (7 vs 5 days open, 5 vs 4 days laparoscopic, 4 vs 3 days robotic) and more frequent complications (42% vs 28% open, 24% vs 17% laparoscopic, 27% vs 13% robotic) but similar discharge home (86% vs 87% open, 94% vs 94% laparoscopic, 93% vs 96% robotic). After adjustment, each additional hour of operative time above the median for a given operation was associated with 1.08 (1.06-1.09) relative risk of longer length of stay for open operations and 1.07 (1.06-1.09) relative risk for minimally invasive operations.

LIMITATIONS

Our study was limited by being retrospective, resulting in selection bias, possible confounders for prolonged operative time, and lack of statistical power for subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Operative time has consistent overlap across surgical approaches. Prolonged operative time is associated with longer length of stay and higher probability of complications, but this negative effect is diminished with minimally invasive approaches. See Video Abstract .

EL IMPACTO DEL TIEMPO OPERATORIO PROLONGADO ASOCIADO CON LA CIRUGA COLORRECTAL MNIMAMENTE INVASIVA UN INFORME DEL PROGRAMA DE EVALUACIN DE RESULTADOS DE ATENCIN QUIRRGICA

ANTECEDENTES:El aumento del tiempo operatorio en la cirugía colorrectal se asocia con peores resultados quirúrgicos. Las operaciones laparoscópicas y robóticas han mejorado los resultados, a pesar de los tiempos operatorios más prolongados. Además, la definición de tiempo operatorio "prolongado" no se ha definido de manera consistente.OBJETIVO:Primero, definir el tiempo operatorio prolongado a través de múltiples operaciones colorrectales y enfoques quirúrgicos. En segundo lugar, describir el impacto del tiempo operatorio prolongado sobre la duración de la estancia y los resultados a corto plazo.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:42 hospitales en el Programa de Evaluación de Resultados de Atención Quirúrgica de 2011-2019.PACIENTES:23 098 pacientes adultos (de 18 años de edad y mayores), que se sometieron a seis operaciones colorrectales electivas comunes: colectomía derecha, colectomía izquierda/sigmoidea, colectomía total, resección anterior baja, anastomosis ileoanal con bolsa o resección abdominoperineal.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Tiempo operatorio prolongado definido como el cuartil 75 de tiempos operatorios para cada operación y abordaje. Los resultados fueron la duración de la estancia hospitalaria, el alta domiciliaria y las complicaciones. Se usaron modelos ajustados para tener en cuenta los factores que podrían afectar tanto el tiempo operatorio como los resultados en los estratos de abordajes abiertos y mínimamente invasivos.RESULTADOS:El tiempo operatorio prolongado se asoció con una estancia media más prolongada (7 vs. 5 días abiertos, 5 vs. 4 días laparoscópicos, 4 vs. 3 días robóticos), complicaciones más frecuentes (42 % vs. 28 % abiertos, 24 % vs. 17 % laparoscópica, 27% vs. 13% robótica), pero similar alta domiciliaria (86% vs. 87% abierta, 94% vs. 94% laparoscópica, 93% vs. 96% robótica). Después del ajuste, cada hora adicional de tiempo operatorio por encima de la mediana para una operación determinada se asoció con un riesgo relativo de 1,08 (1,06, 1,09) de estancia hospitalaria más larga para operaciones abiertas y un riesgo relativo de 1,07 (1,06, 1,09) para operaciones mínimamente invasivas.LIMITACIONES:Nuestro estudio estuvo limitado por ser retrospectivo, lo que resultó en un sesgo de selección, posibles factores de confusión por un tiempo operatorio prolongado y falta de poder estadístico para los análisis de subgrupos.CONCLUSIONES:El tiempo operatorio tiene una superposición constante entre los enfoques quirúrgicos. El tiempo operatorio prolongado se asocia con una estadía más prolongada y una mayor probabilidad de complicaciones, pero este efecto negativo disminuye con los enfoques mínimamente invasivos. ( Traducción-Dr. Mauricio Santamaria ).

Evaluating the Regional Uptake of Minimally Invasive Colorectal Surgery: a Report from the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for colorectal disease has well-known benefits, but many patients undergo open operations. When choosing an MIS approach, robotic technology may have benefits over traditional laparoscopy and is increasingly used. However, the broad adoption of MIS, and specifically robotics, across colorectal operations has not been well described. Our primary hypothesis is that rates of MIS in colorectal surgery are increasing, with different contributions of robotics to abdominal and pelvic colorectal operations.

METHODS

Rates of MIS colorectal operations are described using a prospective cohort of elective colorectal operations at hospitals in the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program (SCOAP) from 2011 to 2018. The main outcome was proportion of cases approached using open, laparoscopic, and robotic surgery. Factors associated with increased use of MIS approaches were described.

RESULTS

Across 21,423 elective colorectal operations, rates for MIS (laparoscopic or robotic surgery) increased from 44% in 2011 to 75% in 2018 (p < 0.001). Approaches for abdominal operations (n = 12,493) changed from 2 to 11% robotic, 43 to 63% laparoscopic, and 56 to 26% open (p < 0.001). Approaches for pelvic operations (n = 8930) changed from 3 to 33% robotic, 40 to 42% laparoscopic, and 57 to 24% open(p < 0.001). These trends were similar for high-(100 + operations/year) and low-volume hospitals and surgeons.

CONCLUSIONS

At SCOAP hospitals, the majority of elective colorectal operations is now performed minimally invasively. The increase in the MIS approach is primarily driven by laparoscopy in abdominal procedures and robotics in pelvic procedures.

The impact of obesity on minimally invasive colorectal surgery: A report from the Surgical Care Outcomes Assessment Program collaborative

BACKGROUND

Operating on obese patients can increase case complexity and result in worse outcomes. We described the incremental impact of BMI on morbidity and outcomes of colorectal operations and whether laparoscopic and robotic(MIS) approaches mitigate this morbidity differently.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of patients undergoing elective colorectal operations in SCOAP was created to examine the association of increasing BMI on surgical outcomes. Additionally, multivariable logistic regression models were constructed.

RESULTS

From 2011 to 2019, 22,863 elective colorectal operations (mean age 62, 55% female) were performed at 42 hospitals. Patients had BMI≥30 in 7576(33%) and BMI≥40 in 1180(5%) of operations. After risk adjustment, BMI≥40 was associated with increased conversions(OR1.57,95%CI1.26-1.96), increased combined adverse events(CAE)(OR1.32,95%CI1.15-1.52), and death(OR2.24, 95%CI1.41-3.55)(all p < 0.01). MIS approaches were each associated with lower CAE(lap OR0.49,95%CI0.46-0.53; robot OR0.42,95%CI0.37-0.47), and death(lap OR0.24,95%CI0.18-0.33; robot OR0.18,95%CI0.10-0.35)(all p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Severe obesity is associated with increased conversion rates and worse short-term outcomes after colorectal surgery, though this trend is partially mitigated with a minimally invasive approach. These findings support the broad application of MIS for colorectal operations in obese patients.

Learning health systems using data to drive healthcare improvement and impact: a systematic review

Background

The transition to electronic health records offers the potential for big data to drive the next frontier in healthcare improvement. Yet there are multiple barriers to harnessing the power of data. The Learning Health System (LHS) has emerged as a model to overcome these barriers, yet there remains limited evidence of impact on delivery or outcomes of healthcare.

Objective

To gather evidence on the effects of LHS data hubs or aligned models that use data to deliver healthcare improvement and impact. Any reported impact on the process, delivery or outcomes of healthcare was captured.

Methods

Systematic review from CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, Medline in-process and Web of Science PubMed databases, using learning health system, data hub, data-driven, ehealth, informatics, collaborations, partnerships, and translation terms. English-language, peer-reviewed literature published between January 2014 and Sept 2019 was captured, supplemented by a grey literature search. Eligibility criteria included studies of LHS data hubs that reported research translation leading to health impact.

Results

Overall, 1076 titles were identified, with 43 eligible studies, across 23 LHS environments. Most LHS environments were in the United States (n = 18) with others in Canada, UK, Sweden and Australia/NZ. Five (21.7%) produced medium-high level of evidence, which were peer-reviewed publications.

Conclusions

LHS environments are producing impact across multiple continents and settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06215-8.