Documentation of individualized preoperative risk assessment: a multi-center study

Background

Individual surgical risk assessment (ISRA) enhances patient care experience and outcomes by informing shared decision-making, strengthening the consent process, and supporting clinical management. Neither the use of individual pre-surgical risk assessment tools nor the rate of individual risk assessment documentation is known. The primary endpoint of this study was to determine the rate of physician documented ISRAs, with or without a named ISRA tool, within the records of patients with poor outcomes. Secondary endpoints of this work included the effects of age, sex, race, ASA class, and time and type of surgery on the rate of documented presurgical risk.

Methods

The records of non-obstetric surgical patients within 22 community-based private hospitals in Arizona, Colorado, Nebraska, Nevada, and Wyoming, between January 1 and December 31, 2017, were evaluated. A two-sample proportion test was used to identify the difference between surgical documentation and anesthesiology documentation of risk. Logistic regression was used to analyze both individual and group effects associated with secondary endpoints.

Results

Seven hundred fifty-six of 140,756 inpatient charts met inclusion criteria (0.54%, 95% CI 0.50 to 0.58%). ISRAs were documented by 16.08% of surgeons and 4.76% of anesthesiologists (p < 0.0001, 95% CI −0.002 to 0.228). Cardiac surgeons documented ISRAs more frequently than non-cardiac surgeons (25.87% vs 16.15%) [p = 0.0086, R-squared = 0.970%]. Elective surgical patients were more likely than emergency surgical patients (19.57 vs 12.03%) to have risk documented (p = 0.023, R-squared = 0.730%). Patients over the age of 65 were more likely than patients under the age of 65 to have ISRA documentation (20.31 vs 14.61%) [p = 0.043, R-squared = 0.580%]. Only 10 of 756 (1.3%) records included documentation of a named ISRA tool.

Conclusions

The observed rate of documented ISRA in our sample was extremely low. Surgeons were more likely than anesthesiologists to document ISRA. As these individualized risk assessment discussions form the bedrock of perioperative informed consent, the rate and quality of risk documentation must be improved.

Recurrence of retained placenta in multiple consecutive deliveries

Objective: Retained placenta is a leading cause of maternal hemorrhage. A history of retained placenta is a well-recognized risk factor for recurrence; however, recurrence risk pattern has not been previously described. We aimed to evaluate the longitudinal recurrence pattern of retained placenta in multiple consecutive deliveries.Methods: This is a retrospective computerized base study conducted at Shaare Zedek Medical Center, a university-affiliated hospital, between 2005 and 2018. Medical records of parturient who had at least one coded diagnosis of either retained partial or complete placenta were retrieved. The first delivery with retained placenta diagnosis was chosen as the index delivery. In order to account for dependency between deliveries of the same individual parturient, we used a multivariate binary logistic regression with generalized estimating equation (GEE) to calculate the individual recurrence risk, adjusted odds ratios (95% confidence interval).Results: During the study period, we identified 2177 parturient diagnosed with retained placenta in the index delivery and that had at least one subsequent delivery; overall 300 (13.8%) parturient had at least one subsequent event of retained placenta: 9.3% for the subsequent delivery and 6% in later deliveries. Induction of labor and epidural analgesia either in the index or in the subsequent delivery were found to be independently associated with recurrence 1.61 (1.16-2.24), 1.45 (1.10-1.90) and 1.46 (1.11-1.93), 1.82 (1.45-2.28), respectively. Complete and not partial retained placenta in the index delivery was also found to be independently associated with recurrence 4.90 (3.90-6.32).Conclusion: For the individual parturient, an event of retained placenta is a sentinel of the subsequent deliveries and has modifiable recurrence risks.

Major milestones in translational oncology

Translational oncology represents a bridge between basic research and clinical practice in cancer medicine. Today, translational research in oncology benefits from an abundance of knowledge resulting from genome-scale studies regarding the molecular pathways involved in tumorigenesis. In this Forum article, we highlight the state of the art of translational oncology in five major cancer types. We illustrate the use of molecular profiling to subtype colorectal cancer for both diagnosis and treatment, and summarize the results of a nationwide screening program for ovarian cancer based on detection of a tumor biomarker in serum. Additionally, we discuss how circulating tumor DNA can be assayed to safely monitor breast cancer over the course of treatment, and report on how therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors is proving effective in advanced lung cancer. Finally, we summarize efforts to use molecular profiling of prostate cancer biopsy specimens to support treatment decisions. Despite encouraging early successes, we cannot disregard the complex genetics of individual susceptibility to cancer nor the enormous complexity of the somatic changes observed in tumors, which urge particular attention to the development of personalized therapies.