What Promotes Surgeon Practice Change? A Scoping Review of Innovation Adoption in Surgical Practice

Level of evidence in high impact surgical literature: the way forward

Evidence-based medicine stipulates that clinical decision-making should revolve around scientific evidence. The goal of the present study is to evaluate the methodological quality of surgical research recently published in JAMA Surgery, International Journal of Surgery, and British Journal of Surgery, the three surgical journals with the highest impact factor. An electronic search of the PUBMED database was performed to retrieve all articles published in the JAMA Surgery, International Journal of Surgery, and British Journal of Surgery in the year 2022. Three authors independently reviewed all retrieved articles and methodological designs of the publications were analyzed and rated using a modification of the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Levels of Evidence (Oxford Levels of Evidence scale). The initial search identified 1236 articles of which 809 were excluded after title and abstract screening. The remaining 427 underwent full text/methods read, of which 164 did not meet the inclusion/exclusion criteria. A total of 273 studies were included in the analysis. The average level of evidence was 2.5 ± 0.8 across all studies assessed. The majority of study designs were comprised of retrospective cohorts (n = 119), prospective cohorts (n = 47), systematic reviews of non RCTs (n = 39), and RCTs (n = 37). There was no significant difference in the average level of evidence between the top three journals (p = 0.50). Most clinical studies in the highest impact factor surgical journals are of level III evidence, consistent with earlier literature. However, our analysis demonstrates a relatively higher percentage of LOE I and II compared to what was previously published in the literature.

Practice Changes Induced by a Traveling Fellowship

The John N. Insall Knee Society Traveling Fellowship selects four international arthroplasty or sports fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons to spend 1 month traveling to various Knee Society members' joint replacement and knee surgery centers in North America. The fellowship aims to foster research and education and shares ideas among fellows and Knee Society members. The role of such traveling fellowships on surgeon preferences has yet to be investigated. A 59-question survey encompassing patient selection, preoperative planning, intraoperative techniques, and postoperative protocols was completed by the four 2018 Insall Traveling Fellows before and immediately after the completion of traveling fellowship to assess anticipated practice changes (e.g., initial excitement) related to their participation in a traveling fellowship. The same survey was completed 4 years after the completion of the traveling fellowship to assess the implementation of the anticipated practice changes. Survey questions were divided into two groups based on levels of evidence in the literature. Immediately after fellowship, there was a median of 6.5 (range: 3-12) anticipated changes in consensus topics and a median of 14.5 (range: 5-17) anticipated changes in controversial topics. There was no statistical difference in the excitement to change consensus or controversial topics (p = 0.921). Four years after completing a traveling fellowship, a median of 2.5 (range: 0-3) consensus topics and 4 (range: 2-6) controversial topics were implemented. There was no statistical difference in the implementation of consensus or controversial topics (p = 0.709). There was a statistically significant decline in the implementation of changes in consensus and controversial preferences compared with the initial level of excitement (p = 0.038 and 0.031, respectively). After the John N. Insall Knee Society Traveling Fellowship, there is excitement for practice change in consensus and controversial topics related to total knee arthroplasty. However, few practice changes that had initial excitement were implemented after 4-year follow-up. Ultimately, the effects of time, practice inertia, and institutional friction overcome most of the anticipated changes induced by a traveling fellowship.

We Choose to Call it 'Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy': Findings of AO Spine RECODE-DCM, an International and Multi-Stakeholder Partnership to Agree a Standard Unifying Term and Definition for a Disease

STUDY DESIGN

Modified DELPHI Consensus Process.

OBJECTIVE

To agree a single unifying term and definition. Globally, cervical myelopathy caused by degenerative changes to the spine is known by over 11 different names. This inconsistency contributes to many clinical and research challenges, including a lack of awareness.

METHOD

AO Spine RECODE-DCM (Research objectives and Common Data Elements Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy). To determine the index term, a longlist of candidate terms and their rationale, was created using a literature review and interviews. This was shared with the community, to select their preferred terms (248 members (58%) including 149 (60%) surgeons, 45 (18%) other healthcare professionals and 54 (22%) People with DCM or their supporters) and finalized using a consensus meeting. To determine a definition, a medical definition framework was created using inductive thematic analysis of selected International Classification of Disease definitions. Separately, stakeholders submitted their suggested definition which also underwent inductive thematic analysis (317 members (76%), 190 (59%) surgeons, 62 (20%) other healthcare professionals and 72 (23%) persons living with DCM or their supporters). Using this definition framework, a working definition was created based on submitted content, and finalized using consensus meetings.

RESULTS

Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy was selected as the unifying term, defined in short, as a progressive spinal cord injury caused by narrowing of the cervical spinal canal.

CONCLUSION

A consistent term and definition can support education and research initiatives. This was selected using a structured and iterative methodology, which may serve as an exemplar for others in the future.

Formative evaluation of the development and implementation of the automated surveillance of postoperative infections tool

BACKGROUND

The gold standard for detecting postoperative complications uses databases like the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, a multi-centered database based on manual chart review. However, their limitations and costs have led many centers to discontinue participation. Novel techniques to detect postoperative complications must be developed and implemented with surgeon involvement, which is paramount to their adoption. We sought to assess surgeons' opinions of a newly developed postoperative complication detection tool, the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections, within the contextual clinical environment.

METHODS

This was a multi-site qualitative formative evaluation of surgeon perceptions of the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections. We conducted semi-structured interviews and focus groups with surgeons and presented the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections concept. Important domains and constructs, as categorized by Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, were identified to support the successful adoption and implementation of the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections.

RESULTS

Twenty-four surgeons with 10 surgical subspecialties were interviewed. The following 4 main themes were found: (1) perception of the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections tool-to provide important data that can improve and support clinical outcomes; (2) environment for implementation-description of factors to support or impede implementation; (3) adaptability of the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections-to work with the complexity of surgical cases; and (4) the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections report format and details.

CONCLUSIONS

We successfully captured the perspectives and suggestions of surgeons to improve the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections and potential barriers during the initial development phase. Barriers included fear of punitive action from reports and complex surgical cases. Facilitators identified were the need to improve clinical outcomes and organizational support. The results of this formative evaluation will be used to further develop Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections, starting with a prototype, the Automated Surveillance of Postoperative Infections 1.0.

Surgeon perspectives on the STITCH trial: a mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

Incisional hernia prevention strategies related to fascial closure technique during laparotomy are well described yet poorly implemented in practice. The factors hindering the surgeon's adoption of evidence-based techniques for fascial closure are poorly understood and characterized.

METHODS

Using an exploratory sequential mixed methods design, we first collected 139 responses to a validated quantitative survey based on a Theoretical Domain Framework for adoption of healthcare practices. Mean scores from survey responses were tabulated, and the findings were used to develop an interview guide for subsequent qualitative individual semi-structured phone interviews. Fourteen practicing surgeons were purposively sampled from social media outlets and our institution. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim for coding and thematic analysis using NVivo 12 Plus. Data from the surveys and interviews were integrated using joint displays.

RESULTS

Quantitative and qualitative analyses from surveys and semi-structured interviews revealed various themes related to surgeon decision-making related to fascial closure technique. Surgeons cited limitations of prior studies, applicability of findings, anecdotal experiences, and situation-specific environments that influence their decision-making. Peer influence and lack of training also affected surgeons' perspectives on integrating small bite technique into practice.

CONCLUSION

Trial design limitations, peer influence, and patient-specific factors impacted surgeon decision-making in the choice of fascial closure technique. Future clinical trials in diverse patient populations may improve surgeons' confidence in implementing technique for fascial closure.

"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.

Development of evidence-based guidelines for the treatment and management of periprosthetic hip infection

Aims

Periprosthetic hip-joint infection is a multifaceted and highly detrimental outcome for patients and clinicians. The incidence of prosthetic joint infection reported within two years of primary hip arthroplasty ranges from 0.8% to 2.1%. Costs of treatment are over five-times greater in people with periprosthetic hip joint infection than in those with no infection. Currently, there are no national evidence-based guidelines for treatment and management of this condition to guide clinical practice or to inform clinical study design. The aim of this study is to develop guidelines based on evidence from the six-year INFection and ORthopaedic Management (INFORM) research programme.

Methods

We used a consensus process consisting of an evidence review to generate items for the guidelines and online consensus questionnaire and virtual face-to-face consensus meeting to draft the guidelines.

Results

The consensus panel comprised 21 clinical experts in orthopaedics, primary care, rehabilitation, and healthcare commissioning. The final output from the consensus process was a 14-item guideline. The guidelines make recommendations regarding increased vigilance and monitoring of those at increased risk of infection; diagnosis including strategies to ensure the early recognition of prosthetic infection and referral to orthopaedic teams; treatment, including early use of DAIR and revision strategies; and postoperative management including appropriate physical and psychological support and antibiotic strategies.

Conclusion

We believe the implementation of the INFORM guidelines will inform treatment protocols and clinical pathways to improve the treatment and management of periprosthetic hip infection.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(4):226–233.

Surgeon Perspectives on Determinants of Same-Day Mastectomy: A Roadmap for Implementing Change

BACKGROUND

Same-day discharge after mastectomy without immediate reconstruction (MwoR) has been shown to be safe, with improved patient satisfaction when compared with patients discharged 1 or more days after surgery. Nevertheless, only 16% of patients undergoing MwoR in Michigan are discharged on the day of surgery, with significant variation between facilities (3-88%). Our objective was to explore determinants of same-day discharge and offer strategies for broader implementation of this practice.

METHODS

We conducted semi-structured interviews with surgeons performing MwoR across the state of Michigan. Recruitment utilized purposeful and snowball sampling methods. The Tailored Implementation in Chronic Disease (TICD) framework was used to inform the creation of the interview guide. Interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using directed content analysis guided by the TICD framework. Salient determinants were organized into patient, provider, and system-level factors.

RESULTS

Participants (n = 26) included general surgeons, breast surgeons, and surgical oncologists. Most surgeons (n = 18, 69%) reported that they discharged fewer than 60% of patients the same day after MwoR. The most common barriers included patient knowledge at the patient level; awareness of evidence, surgeon dogma, and peer influence at the provider level; and team processes and operating room logistics at the system level.

CONCLUSION

We identified surgeon-defined determinants of same-day discharge after MwoR. For the identified barriers, potential implementation strategies could include incorporation of preoperative drain teachings for patients, utilizing consensus statements and opinion leaders to disseminate evidence supporting same-day mastectomies, and conducting workshops with relevant stakeholders to establish consistent facility practice patterns among surgical teams.

Barriers and Facilitators in Implementation of an Esophagectomy Care Pathway: a Qualitative Analysis

INTRODUCTION

A new postoperative esophagectomy care pathway was recently implemented at our institution. Practice pattern change among provider teams can prove challenging; therefore, we sought to study the barriers and facilitators toward pathway implementation at the provider level.

METHODS

This qualitative study was guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to study the adoption and implementation of a post-esophagectomy care pathway. Sixteen in-depth interviews were conducted with providers involved with the pathway. Matrix analysis was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

Providers included attending surgeons (n = 6), advanced practice providers (n = 8), registered dietitian (n = 1), and clinic staff (n = 1). TDF domains that were salient across our findings included knowledge, beliefs about consequences, social influences, and environmental context and resources. Identified facilitators included were electronic health record tools, such as note templates including pathway components and a pathway-specific order set, patient satisfaction, and preliminary data indicating clinical benefits such as a reduced anastomotic leak rate. The major barrier reported was a hesitance to abandon previous practice patterns, most prevalent at the attending surgeon level.

CONCLUSION

The TDF enabled us to identify and understand the individuals' perceived barriers and facilitators toward adoption and implementation of a postoperative esophagectomy pathway. This analysis can help guide and improve adoption of surgical patient care pathways among providers.

Implementing change in the care of the complex cardiac patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Development of advanced and minimally invasive surgical procedures is providing treatment opportunities to older and higher risk patients. This has also led to highly specialized physicians and a need for better communication and planning with the patients and within the care team.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the field of cardiac surgery, the heart team model has been advocated and implemented as a vehicle to optimize decision making prior to procedure, care during the procedure and in the recovery process. The goal is to provide a treatment path that prioritizes the patient's goals and to anticipate and minimize complications.

SUMMARY

In this review, we discuss the concepts of shared decision making (SDM) and implementation science in the context of the complex cardiac patient. We also review the most recent evidence for their use in cardiac surgery. We argue that a team model not only bridges knowledge gaps but provides a multidisciplinary environment for the practice of SDM and implementation of evidence-based practices. Be believe this will provide patients with a better experience as they navigate their care and improve their medical outcomes as well.

Contemporary Management of Ischemic Mitral Regurgitation at Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting

BACKGROUND

Recent guidelines for the treatment of moderate or severe ischemic mitral regurgitation (IMR) in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) have changed. This study assessed the real-world impact of changing guidelines on the management of IMR during CABG over time. We hypothesized that the utilization of mitral valve repair for IMR would decrease over time, whereas mitral valve replacement for severe IMR would increase.

METHODS

Patients undergoing CABG in a statewide collaborative database (2011-2020) were stratified by severity of IMR. Trends in mitral valve repair or replacement were evaluated. To account for differences of the patients, propensity score-matched analyses were used to compare patients with and without mitral intervention.

RESULTS

A total of 11,676 patients met inclusion criteria, including 1355 (11.6%) with moderate IMR and 390 (3.3%) with severe IMR. The proportion of patients undergoing mitral intervention for moderate IMR decreased over time (2011, 17.7%; 2020, 7.5%; P_trend = .001), whereas mitral replacement for severe IMR remained stable (2011, 11.1%; 2020, 13.3%; P_trend = .14). Major morbidity was higher for patients with moderate IMR who underwent mitral intervention (29.1% vs 19.9%; P = .005). In a propensity analysis of 249 well-matched pairs, there was no difference in major morbidity (29.3% with mitral intervention vs 23.7% without; P = .16) or operative mortality (1.2% vs 2.4%; P = .5).

CONCLUSIONS

Consistent with recent guideline updates, patients with moderate IMR were less likely to undergo mitral repair. However, the rate of replacement for severe IMR did not change. Mitral intervention during CABG did not increase operative mortality or morbidity.

Current issues and future considerations for the wider implementation of robotic-assisted surgery: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVES

The effective implementation of a fast-changing healthcare delivery innovation, such as robotic-assisted surgery (RAS), into a healthcare system, can be affected (both positively and negatively) by external contextual factors. As part of a wider project investigating ways to optimise the implementation of RAS, this qualitative study aimed to uncover current issues of RAS and predictions about the future of robotic surgery. We refer to 'current issues' as the topical and salient challenges and opportunities related to the introduction of RAS in the UK healthcare system, from the perspectives of key stakeholders involved in the delivery and implementation of RAS.

DESIGN

Semi-structured interviews and focus groups were conducted. A thematic analysis was conducted to summarise salient issues that were articulated by the participants.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

The interview sample (n=35) comprised surgeons, wider theatre staff and other relevant personnel involved in the introduction and delivery of RAS services across the UK, including service managers and policymakers/commissioners. Two focus groups were also conducted with surgical trainees (n=7) and members of the public (n=8), respectively.

RESULTS

The results revealed a largely positive attitude towards the introduction of RAS technology and an expectation of continued rapid expansion. Areas perceived to be particularly pertinent and requiring ongoing attention were also highlighted, including the need to achieve improved quality control, expertise quantification and training issues and the need to educate the public. Issues of centralisation, service organisation and equity of access were also emphasised.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study has highlighted a range of issues perceived to be particularly pertinent to the current and future provision of RAS which should be addressed. The areas outlined can enable healthcare managers and surgeons to plan for the adoption and/or expansion of RAS services.

Shared Learning Utilizing Digital Methods in Surgery to Enhance Transparency in Surgical Innovation: Protocol for a Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

Surgical innovation can lead to important improvements in patient outcomes. Currently, information and knowledge about novel procedures and devices are disseminated informally and in an unstandardized way (eg, through social media). This can lead to ineffective and inefficient knowledge sharing among surgeons, which can result in the harmful repetition of mistakes and delay in the uptake of promising innovation. Improvements are needed in the way that learning in surgical innovation is shared through the development of novel, real-time methods, informed by a contemporary and comprehensive investigation of existing methods.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this scoping review is to explore the application of existing digital methods for training/education and feedback to surgeons in the context of performing invasive surgical procedures. This work will (1) summarize existing methods for shared learning in surgery and how they are characterized and operationalized, (2) examine the impact of their application, and (3) explore their benefits and barriers to implementation. The findings of this scoping review will inform the development of novel, real-time methods to optimize shared learning in surgical innovation.

METHODS

This study will adhere to the recommended guidelines for conducting scoping reviews. A total of 6 different searches will be conducted within multiple sources (2 electronic databases, journals, social media, gray literature, commercial websites, and snowball searches) to comprehensively identify relevant articles and data. Searches will be limited to articles published in the English language within the last 5 years. Wherever possible, a 2-stage study selection process will be followed whereby the eligibility of articles will be assessed through the title, abstract, and full-text screening independently by 2 reviewers. Inclusion criteria will be articles providing data on (1) fully qualified theater staff involved in performing invasive procedures, (2) one or more methods for shared learning (ie, digital means for training/education and feedback), and (3) qualitative or quantitative evaluations of this method. Data will be extracted (10% double data extraction by an independent reviewer) into a piloted proforma and analyzed using descriptive statistics, narrative summaries, and principles of thematic analysis.

RESULTS

The study commenced in October 2021 and is planned to be completed in 2023. To date, systematic searches were applied to 2 electronic databases (MEDLINE and Web of Science) and returned a total of 10,093 records. The results of this scoping review will be published as open access in a peer-reviewed journal.

CONCLUSIONS

This scoping review of methods for shared learning in surgery is, to our knowledge, the most comprehensive and up-to-date investigation that maps current information on this topic. Ultimately, efficient and effective sharing of information and knowledge of novel procedures and devices has the potential to optimize the evaluation of early-phase surgical research and reduce harmful innovation.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

PRR1-10.2196/37544.

Barriers and enablers to the effective implementation of robotic assisted surgery

Background

Implementation of Robotic Assisted Surgery (RAS) is complex as it requires adjustments to associated physical infrastructure, but also changes to processes and behaviours. With the global objective of optimising and improving RAS implementation, this study aimed to: 1) Explore the barriers and enablers to RAS service adoption, incorporating an assessment of behavioural influences; 2) Provide an optimised plan for effective RAS implementation, with the incorporation of theory-informed implementation strategies that have been adapted to address the barriers/enablers that affect RAS service adoption.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with RAS personnel and stakeholders, including: surgeons, theatre staff, managers, industry representatives, and policy-makers/commissioners. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) was used to identify barriers and enablers that represent individual behaviours, capabilities, attitudes, beliefs, and external organisational factors that influence the implementation of RAS.

Results

Findings suggest that implementation planning has three separate phases–pre-, early, and late implementation. For pre-implementation, barriers and enablers identified included the cost of RAS equipment and issues of economic viability, weak outcome evidence for RAS, a preponderance of an eminence driven model, the clinician/manager relationship, and views around the uptake and expansion of RAS in the future. Early implementation findings revealed role changes for theatre personnel and an enhanced team approach, reliance on industry for training provision, and changes in skill sets and attentional processes. Late implementation factors included equipment maintenance costs, technological limitations, changes to cognition during RAS routine use, and benefits to institutions/healthcare professionals (such as ergonomic improvement).

Conclusion

Together, findings suggest the factors that affect RAS implementation are multi-faceted and change across the life-cycle of intervention adoption. Theory-informed strategies are suggested which can optimise implementation of RAS. Optimisation strategies need planning from the outset.

How Do Academic Otolaryngologists Decide to Implement New Procedures Into Practice?

OBJECTIVE

To identify barriers and facilitators to adoption of a new surgical procedure via an implementation science framework to characterize associated socioemotional, clinical, and decision-making processes.

STUDY DESIGN

Qualitative study with a semistructured interview approach.

SETTING

Large tertiary care referral center.

METHODS

Academic otolaryngologists with at least 2 years of practice were identified and interviewed. Transcripts were thematically coded and separated into steps in the clinical pathway. Synthesis of major themes characterized facilitators and barriers to uptake of a new surgical technique.

RESULTS

Of 22 otolaryngologists, 19 were interviewed (85% male). They had a median 18 years of practice (interquartile range, 7.8-26.3), and 65% were subspecialty trained. In the decision to implement a new procedure, improving patient outcomes and addressing unmet clinical needs facilitated adoption, whereas costs and adopting profit-driven technologies without improved outcomes were barriers. In patient consults, establishing trust facilitated implementation of new techniques; barriers included participants' hesitation to communicate about the unknowns of a new procedure. Intraoperatively, little change to existing workflow or improved efficiency facilitated adoption, while a substantial learning curve for the new procedure was a barrier. Achieving favorable outcomes and patient satisfaction sustained implementation of new procedures. Too few referrals or indications for the new procedure hindered implementation.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates that innovation in otolaryngology is often an individual iterative process that providers pursue to improve patients' outcomes. Although models for the oversight of surgical innovation emphasize the need for evidence, obtaining sufficient numbers of providers and patients to generate evidence remains a challenge in specialty surgical practice.

Dissemination and Implementation Science in Cardiothoracic Surgery: A Review and Case Study

Dissemination and implementation (D&I) science is the practice of taking evidence-based interventions (EBI) and sustainably incorporating them in routine clinical practice. As a relatively young field, D&I techniques are underutilized in cardiothoracic surgery. This review offers an overview of D&I science from the context of the cardiothoracic surgeon. First, we provide a general introduction to D&I science and basic terminology that is used in the field. Second, to illustrate D&I techniques in a real-world example, we discuss a case study for implementing lung protective management (LPM) strategies for lung donor optimization nationally. Finally, we discuss challenges to successful implementation that are unique to cardiothoracic surgery and give several examples of EBIs that have been poorly implemented into surgical practice. We also provide examples of successful D&I interventions - including de-implementation strategies - from other surgical subspecialties. We hope that this review offers additional tools for cardiothoracic surgeons to explore when introducing EBIs into routine practice.

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.