Fatal flaws in clinical decision making

Triage and outcomes for a whole cohort of patients presenting for major emergency abdominal surgery including the No-LAP population: a prospective single-center observational study

PURPOSE

This study aimed to characterize 252 consecutive patients with an indication for major emergency abdominal surgery including patients not proceeding to surgery (No-Lap). Patients who do not proceed to major emergency abdominal surgery and their clinical outcomes are not well characterized in the existing literature. Triage criteria may vary between centers, potentially impacting reported outcomes.

METHODS

A single-center prospective observational study in a high-volume Danish surgical center including 252 patients presenting with an indication for major emergent abdominal surgery was conducted from the 15th of October 2020 to the 15th of August 2021. The primary outcome was to estimate the prevalence of No-Lap patients.

RESULTS

Overall, 21 patients (8.3%) of our total study cohort did not proceed to surgery. These patients were significantly older, more comorbid with higher ASA scores, poorer performance status, and were more likely to have bowel ischemia. Poor functional performance and surgeons' consideration of futile intervention were the main reasons for deferring surgery in all 21 patients. Overall, 30-day mortality was 95% for the No-LAP cohort, 9% for the LAP cohort, and 16% for the whole cohort, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The No-LAP group selection process could be one of the main determinants of reported postoperative outcomes. Prospective international multi-center studies to characterize the entire cohort of patients eligible for emergency laparotomy including the No-LAP population are needed, as large variations in triage criteria and culture seem to exist. Trial registration Retrospectively registered.

The long game: Evolution of clinical decision making throughout residency and fellowship

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to explore the trajectory of autonomy in clinical decision making.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative secondary analysis of interviews with 45 residents and fellows from the General Surgery and Obstetrics & Gynecology departments across all clinical postgraduate years (PGY) using convenience sampling. Each interview was recorded, transcribed and iteratively analyzed using a framework method.

RESULTS

A total of 16 junior residents, 22 senior residents and 7 fellows participated in 12 original interviews. Early in training residents take their abstract ideas about disease processes and make them concrete in their applications to patient care. A transitional stage follows in which residents apply concepts to concrete patient care. Chief residents re-abstract their concrete technical and clinical knowledge to prepare for future surgical practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding where each learner is on this pathway will assist development of curriculum that fosters resident readiness for practice at each PGY level.

Potentially avoidable issues in urology mortality cases in Australia: identification and improvements

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to identify the most common potentially avoidable factors in urology deaths, focusing on the lessons that can be learnt.

METHODS

This study analysed data from a well-established and comprehensive peer review audit of surgical deaths in Australian hospitals (excluding New South Wales) from 2009 to 2015, focusing on urology cases with identified areas for improvement in patient management. Of all audited deaths, 11% (79/719) had serious clinical management issues with a total of 109 individual clinical management issues identified. These were categorized based on perioperative stage (preoperative, intraoperative or post-operative), followed by thematic analysis within each stage.

RESULTS

The study found preoperative issues to be the most common (n = 48), followed by post-operative issues (n = 32) with intraoperative issues less common (n = 13). Communication issues were seen at all three stages (n = 16). Overall, the most common theme was at the preoperative stage; inadequate preoperative assessment (n = 27). More specifically, the most common preoperative assessment issues involved a failure to order necessary preoperative investigations, or to administer necessary preoperative treatment (e.g. prophylactic antibiotics). The most common communication issue was between teams and at handover, often involving failure by junior medical staff to communicate issues to the responsible surgical consultant.

CONCLUSION

Urological surgical cases with potentially avoidable mortality constitute a small, but important subset of deaths. The analysis of these cases can inform various stakeholders to improve the quality and safety of urological surgical care.