Surgery should be routinely videoed

Barriers to the adoption of routine surgical video recording: a mixed-methods qualitative study of a real-world implementation of a video recording platform

BACKGROUND

Routine surgical video recording has multiple benefits. Video acts as an objective record of the operative record, allows video-based coaching and is integral to the development of digital technologies. Despite these benefits, adoption is not widespread. To date, only questionnaire studies have explored this failure in adoption. This study aims to determine the barriers and provide recommendations for the implementation of routine surgical video recording.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A pre- and post-pilot questionnaire surrounding a real-world implementation of a C-SATS©, an educational recording and surgical analytics platform, was conducted in a university teaching hospital trust. Usage metrics from the pilot study and descriptive analyses of questionnaire responses were used with the non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread, sustainability (NASSS) framework to create topic guides for semi-structured interviews. Transcripts of interviews were evaluated in an inductive thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Engagement with the C-SATS© platform failed to reach consistent levels with only 57 videos uploaded. Three attending surgeons, four surgical residents, one scrub nurse, three patients, one lawyer, and one industry representative were interviewed, all of which perceived value in recording. Barriers of 'change,' 'resource,' and 'governance,' were identified as the main themes. Resistance was centred on patient misinterpretation of videos. Participants believed availability of infrastructure would facilitate adoption but integration into surgical workflow is required. Regulatory uncertainty was centred around anonymity and data ownership.

CONCLUSION

Barriers to the adoption of routine surgical video recording exist beyond technological barriers alone. Priorities for implementation include integration recording into the patient record, engaging all stakeholders to ensure buy-in, and formalising consent processes to establish patient trust.

Reducing the risk of NHS disasters

How could we better use public inquiries to stem the recurrence of healthcare failures? The question seems ever relevant, prompted this time by the inquiry into how former nurse Letby was able to murder newborns under National Health Service care. While criminality, like Letby's, can be readily condemned, other factors like poor leadership and culture seem more often regretted than reformed. I would argue this is where inquiries struggle, in the space between ethics and law-with what is awful but lawful. In response, we should learn from progress with informed consent. Inquiries and civil litigation have seen uninformed 'consent' shift from being undesirable to unlawful. If better leadership and culture were sole drivers here, we would likely be doing far better in many other areas of healthcare too. Instead, one could argue that progress on consent has been made by reducing epistemic injustice-by naming and addressing epistemic issues in ways that enhance social power for patients. If this is an ingredient that transforms clinician-patient working, might it also shift conduct within other key relationships, by showing up what else should become unlawful and why? Naming medical paternalism may have helped with consent reform, so I continue this approach, first naming two areas of epistemic injustice: management feudalism and legal chokeholds Remedies are then considered, including the democratisation of management and reforms to legal ethics, legislation and litigation. In brief, public inquiries may improve if they also target epistemic injustices that should become unlawful. Focus on informed consent and epistemic relationships has improved the medical profession. Likewise, it could help healthcare leaders shift from fiat towards consent, and their lawyers from a stifling professional secrecy towards the kind of candour a prudent public expects.

Adoption of routine surgical video recording: a nationwide freedom of information act request across England and Wales

Background

Surgical video contains data with significant potential to improve surgical outcome assessment, quality assurance, education, and research. Current utilisation of surgical video recording is unknown and related policies/governance structures are unclear.

Methods

A nationwide Freedom of Information (FOI) request concerning surgical video recording, technology, consent, access, and governance was sent to all acute National Health Service (NHS) trusts/boards in England/Wales between 20th February and 20th March 2023.

Findings

140/144 (97.2%) trusts/boards in England/Wales responded to the FOI request. Surgical procedures were routinely recorded in 22 trusts/boards. The median estimate of consultant surgeons routinely recording their procedures was 20%. Surgical video was stored on internal systems (n = 27), third-party products (n = 29), and both (n = 9). 32/140 (22.9%) trusts/boards ask for consent to record procedures as part of routine care. Consent for recording included non-clinical purposes in 55/140 (39.3%) trusts/boards. Policies for surgeon/patient access to surgical video were available in 48/140 (34.3%) and 32/140 (22.9%) trusts/boards, respectively. Surgical video was used for non-clinical purposes in 64/140 (45.7%) trusts/boards. Governance policies covering surgical video recording, use, and/or storage were available from 59/140 (42.1%) trusts/boards.

Interpretation

There is significant heterogeneity in surgical video recording practices in England and Wales. A minority of trusts/boards routinely record surgical procedures, with large variation in recording/storage practices indicating scope for NHS-wide coordination. Revision of surgical video consent, accessibility, and governance policies should be prioritised by trusts/boards to protect key stakeholders. Increased availability of surgical video is essential for patients and surgeons to maximally benefit from the ongoing digital transformation of surgery.

Funding

KL is supported by an NIHR Academic Clinical Fellowship and acknowledges infrastructure support for this research from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC).

Surgomics: personalized prediction of morbidity, mortality and long-term outcome in surgery using machine learning on multimodal data

BACKGROUND

Personalized medicine requires the integration and analysis of vast amounts of patient data to realize individualized care. With Surgomics, we aim to facilitate personalized therapy recommendations in surgery by integration of intraoperative surgical data and their analysis with machine learning methods to leverage the potential of this data in analogy to Radiomics and Genomics.

METHODS

We defined Surgomics as the entirety of surgomic features that are process characteristics of a surgical procedure automatically derived from multimodal intraoperative data to quantify processes in the operating room. In a multidisciplinary team we discussed potential data sources like endoscopic videos, vital sign monitoring, medical devices and instruments and respective surgomic features. Subsequently, an online questionnaire was sent to experts from surgery and (computer) science at multiple centers for rating the features' clinical relevance and technical feasibility.

RESULTS

In total, 52 surgomic features were identified and assigned to eight feature categories. Based on the expert survey (n = 66 participants) the feature category with the highest clinical relevance as rated by surgeons was "surgical skill and quality of performance" for morbidity and mortality (9.0 ± 1.3 on a numerical rating scale from 1 to 10) as well as for long-term (oncological) outcome (8.2 ± 1.8). The feature category with the highest feasibility to be automatically extracted as rated by (computer) scientists was "Instrument" (8.5 ± 1.7). Among the surgomic features ranked as most relevant in their respective category were "intraoperative adverse events", "action performed with instruments", "vital sign monitoring", and "difficulty of surgery".

CONCLUSION

Surgomics is a promising concept for the analysis of intraoperative data. Surgomics may be used together with preoperative features from clinical data and Radiomics to predict postoperative morbidity, mortality and long-term outcome, as well as to provide tailored feedback for surgeons.