Search

Background Telehealth may be an important care delivery modality in reducing dropout from bariatric surgery programs which is reported globally at approximately 50%. Methods In this convergent mixed methods case study of a large, US healthcare system, we examine the impact of telehealth implementation in 2020 on pre-operative bariatric surgery visits and provider perspectives of telehealth use. Results We find that telehealth was significantly associated with a 38% reduction in no-show rate compared with the prior year. Additionally, providers had positive experiences with regard to the appropriateness and feasibility of using telehealth in the pre-operative bariatric surgery process. Conclusions Telehealth use in the pre-operative bariatric surgery process may lead to greater efficiency in healthcare resource utilization. Insurance providers and bariatric accreditation bodies globally should consider accepting telehealth visits and self-reported weights when determining coverage decisions to ensure access for patients.

Hiatal hernia repair performed at the time of laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG) may reduce post-operative reflux symptoms. It is unclear whether intra-operative diagnosis of hiatal hernia varies among surgeons or if it affects outcomes. Surgeons (n = 38) participating in a statewide bariatric surgery quality improvement collaborative reviewed 33 videos of LSG in which no hiatal hernia repair was performed. Reviewers were blinded to patient information and were asked whether they perceived a hiatal hernia. Surgeon characteristics and surgeon-specific patient outcomes for LSG were compared between surgeons who identified at least one hiatal hernia during video review and those who did not. Ten surgeons (26%) identified at least one hiatal hernia after reviewing the videos. There were no significant differences in operative experience or practice type between surgeons who did and did not identify hiatal hernias. Surgeons who identified a hiatal hernia more often performed concurrent hiatal hernia repair in their practice when compared to those who did not (43.0% versus 36.5%, p

Financial conflicts of interest (COI) have been shown to affect the interpretation of scientific findings. Publications with unreported COI tend to be more favorable to industry. Since 2014 industry payments to United States (US) physicians are publicly reported in the Open Payments Database (OPD). Several studies show high levels of unreported COI in medical literature; however, there is no research examining COI reporting at surgical conferences. We hypothesized that compliance with the COI disclosure requirement would be high at the 2018 SAGES meeting. However, we expected to find significant discrepancy between speaker-reported and OPD-reported COI. A secondary aim was to characterize the amount, source, and variation in industry payments to invited speakers. We reviewed all available presentations from SAGES 2018 as recorded and publicly available on YouTube™ for the presence of COI disclosure and the disclosed industry relationships. For US physicians we searched the OPD and recorded all industry payments > $500. We compared the self-disclosed COI for each speaker with OPD records. Presentation topics were divided into ten groups to determine which topics received the most funding. Of the 526 invited presentations, 479 (91%) videos were available. Disclosures were reported by 414 presenters (86.4%). There were 420 unique presenters of which 315 were listed in the OPD. Speaker-reported disclosures were fully concordant with the OPD in 38.3% (121/315) of cases with 39% (123/315) under-reporting disclosures. Of presenters listed in OPD, the median payment was $992 ($0–$374,502) with a total of $6,389,097 paid in 2017. SAGES speakers failed to disclose $2,049,535 worth of industry payments with an average undisclosed payment of $16,662.88 (± $40,733.19). The largest financial contributor was Intuitive Surgical with $1,981,169 paid. Among topics, robotics and hernia received the most funding with $2,593,925 (40.6%) and $2,591,671 (40.5%) paid, respectively. Overall compliance with SAGES disclosure rules is high. There remains a discrepancy between speaker- and industry-reported disclosures, including a number of undisclosed payments, some of which are substantial. Adjustments to disclosure rules to include the relative amount of compensation may be warranted.

Although ventral hernia repair (VHR) is extremely common, there is profound variation in operative technique and outcomes. This study describes the results of a statewide registry capturing hernia-specific variables to understand population-level practice patterns.Retrospective analysis of adult patients in a new statewide hernia registry undergoing VHR in 2020.919 patients underwent VHR across 57 hospitals and 279 surgeons. Hernia width was2 cm in 233 (25%) patients, 2-5 cm in 420 (46%) patients, 5-10 cm in 171 (19%) patients, and10 cm in 95 (10%) patients. Mesh was used in 79% of cases and varied in use from 53% of hernias2 cm to 95% of hernias10 cm. The most common mesh type was synthetic non-absorbable (46%), followed by synthetic absorbable mesh (37%). The incidence of complications was significantly associated with hernia width.A population-level, hernia-specific database captured operative details for 919 patients in 1 year. There was significant variation in mesh use and outcomes based on hernia size. These nuanced data may inform higher quality clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Opioid use after bariatric surgery is not clearly understood. Few guidelines exist to inform opioid prescribing practices after bariatric surgery. OBJECTIVE: To understand opioid use following bariatric surgery. SETTING: University Hospital. METHODS: Bariatric surgery patients at a single center were prospectively surveyed at the time of their post-operative visit (January-May 2018). Patients were asked about their opioid use following surgery, whether they received education about opioid use, and what they did with leftover medications. Demographic and operative details were obtained from the medical record. RESULTS: Among 33 patients, the majority (n=29, 88%) were female with a median age of 40 (20–68) and body mass index of 44.8 (33–78.5). Most patients had leftover narcotics (n=25, 73%). The median number of pills used was 15 (0–48). Only 12 patients (36%) thought that they had been prescribed “too much” pain medication. Most patients reported receiving education about expectations for post-operative pain (n=22, 69%); few recalled education about reducing or stopping opioids (n=13, 40%). More than half of patients (n=17, 53%) kept their leftover opioids rather than disposing of them or bringing them to an approved turn in location. CONCLUSIONS: Despite most patients having leftover opioids following surgery, few patients recognized possible over prescription. Education regarding opioid use following surgery is inconsistent, potentially contributing to the amount of retained opioids currently available. Future guidelines should focus on determining the appropriate amount of opioids to be prescribed following surgery and standardizing and improving education given to patients.

Among patients with acute appendicitis (AA), perforation is thought to be associated with symptom duration before treatment. Perforation rates vary between hospitals raising the possibility that some perforations are preventable. The factors that compel patients to present earlier or later are unknown but are critical in developing quality improvement interventions aimed at reducing perforation rates.The Appendicitis Patient Pre-Hospital Experience (APPE) Survey is a prospective study of adults and parents of children with AA in six hospitals participating in Washington State's Comparative Effectiveness Research Translation Network (CERTAIN). The APPE survey includes questions about symptom duration before presentation (late defined as24 h), predisposing characteristics, enabling factors, and need.Among 80 patients, perforation occurred more frequently in late presenters (44% versus 11%, P 0.01). Late presenters more frequently drove themselves to the hospital (64% versus 52%, P = 0.05) as opposed to relying on friends/family members and described their health behavior as "waiting it out" when something is wrong (71% versus 46%, P = 0.03). We found similar sociodemographics, clinical characteristics, health care utilization, optimism, health care trust, and risk taking between the two cohorts.Late presenters described reduced social support and a tendency to "wait it out" and had higher rates of perforation than early presenters. These characteristics have not been well-studied conditions but are important to understand to identify patients at high risk for delayed presentation. Future interventions might target those with low social support or those who are reluctant to seek care early to decrease rates of perforation.

Surgical site infection (SSI) after spine surgery is classified as a "never event" by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid. Intra-wound antibiotics (IWA) have been proposed to reduce the incidence of SSI, but robust evidence to support its use is lacking.Prospective cohort undergoing spine fusion at 20 Washington State hospitals (July 2011 to March 2014) participating in the Spine Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program (Spine SCOAP) linked to a discharge tracking system. Patient, hospital, and operative factors associated with SSI and IWA use during index hospitalizations through 600 days were analyzed using a random effects logistic model (index), and a time-to-event analysis (follow-up) using Cox proportional hazards.A total of 9,823 patients underwent cervical (47%) or lumbar (53%) procedures (mean age, 58; 54% female) with an SSI rate of 1.1% during index hospitalization. Those with SSI were older, more often had diabetes mellitus, and more frequently underwent lumbar (versus cervical) fusion compared with those without SSI (all p 0.01). Unadjusted rates of SSI during index hospitalization were lower in patients who received IWA (0.8% versus 1.5%). After adjustment for patient, hospital, and operative factors, no benefit was observed in those receiving IWA (odds ratio [OR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-1.03). At 12 mo, unadjusted rates of SSI were 2.4% and 3.0% for those who did and did not receive antibiotics; after adjustment there was no significant difference (hazard ratio [HR] 0.94, 95% CI: 0.62-1.42).Whereas unadjusted analyses indicate a nearly 50% reduction in index SSI using IWA, we did not observe a statistically significant difference after adjustment. Despite its size, this study is underpowered to detect small but potentially relevant improvements in rates of SSI. It remains to be determined if IWA should be promoted as a quality improvement intervention. Concerns related to bias in the use of IWA suggest the benefit of a randomized trial.

Randomized trials show that pneumatic dilation (PD) ≥30 mm and laparoscopic myotomy (LM) provide equivalent symptom relief and disease-related quality of life for patients with achalasia. However, questions remain about the safety, burden, and costs of treatment options.We performed a retrospective cohort study of achalasia patients initially treated with PD or LM (2009 to 2014) using the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases. All patients had 1 year of follow-up after initial treatment. We compared safety, health care use, and total and out-of-pocket costs using generalized linear models.Among 1,061 patients, 82% were treated with LM. The LM patients were younger (median age 49 vs 52 years; p0.01), but were similar in terms of sex (p = 0.80) and prevalence of comorbid conditions (p = 0.11). There were no significant differences in the 1-year cumulative risk of esophageal perforation (LM 0.8% vs PD 1.6%; p = 0.32) or 30-day mortality (LM 0.3% vs PD 0.5%; p = 0.71). Laparoscopic myotomy was associated with an 82% lower rate of reintervention (p0.01), a 29% lower rate of subsequent diagnostic testing (p0.01), and a 53% lower rate of readmission (p0.01). Total and out-of-pocket costs were not significantly different (p0.05).In the US, LM appears to be the preferred treatment for achalasia. Both LM and PD appear to be safe interventions. Along a short time horizon, the costs of LM and PD were not different. Mirroring findings from randomized trials, LM is associated with fewer reinterventions, less diagnostic testing, and fewer hospitalizations.

Context: Lack of engagement with healthcare stakeholders results in missed opportunities to understand translation of evidence into practice.Case: Stakeholder engagement is a key component of the Comparing Outcomes of Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) Study, a pragmatic clinical trial funded by PCORI to evaluate the effectiveness of antibiotics versus urgent appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis. We provide a framework for developing a stakeholder coordinating center (SCC) and describe two examples of how stakeholder engagement can inform study development.Findings: Coordinating engagement activities through the SCC established a commitment to the important partnership with stakeholders. It also facilitated communication and provided a central mechanism for obtaining input on key decisions such as development of patient-centered consent documents and appropriate stopping rules for a specific sub-population of patients with appendicitis.Major themes: Translatable lessons include thoughtful planning for engagement, identifying stakeholders with a direct interest in the study conduct and findings, and integration of input received into the decisions that drive the conduct of the study.Conclusions: Standards for conducting patient-centered research should address the ability to successfully engage patients by demonstrating the capacity to recruit study participants, engage them over the duration of the study, and disseminate findings that are congruent with stakeholder needs. The process of sharing important clinical research findings has improved patient care, and we believe that dissemination of novel engagement strategies can lead to increased success in study design and execution.

Background Prospect theory suggests that when faced with an uncertain outcome, people display loss aversion by preferring to risk a greater loss rather than incurring certain, lesser cost. Providing probability information improves decision making towards the economically optimal choice in these situations. Clinicians frequently make decisions when the outcome is uncertain, and loss aversion may influence choices. This study explores the extent to which prospect theory, loss aversion, and probability information in a non-clinical domain explains clinical decision making under uncertainty. Methods Four hundred sixty two participants (n = 117 non-medical undergraduates, n = 113 medical students, n = 117 resident trainees, and n = 115 medical/surgical faculty) completed a three-part online task. First, participants completed an iced-road salting task using temperature forecasts with or without explicit probability information. Second, participants chose between less or more risk-averse (“defensive medicine”) decisions in standardized scenarios. Last, participants chose between recommending therapy with certain outcomes or risking additional years gained or lost. Results In the road salting task, the mean expected value for decisions made by clinicians was better than for non-clinicians(−$1,022 vs -$1,061

Background Randomized trials have found that alvimopan hastens return of bowel function and reduces length of stay (LOS) by 1 day among patients undergoing colorectal surgery. However, its effectiveness in routine clinical practice and its impact on hospital costs remain uncertain. Study Design We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery in Washington state (2009 to 2013) using data from a clinical registry (Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program) linked to a statewide hospital discharge database (Comprehensive Hospital Abstract Reporting System). We used generalized estimating equations to evaluate the relationship between alvimopan and outcomes, and adjusted for patient, operative, and management characteristics. Hospital charges were converted to costs using hospital-specific charge to cost ratios, and were adjusted for inflation to 2013 US dollars. Results Among 14,781 patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery at 51 hospitals, 1,615 (11%) received alvimopan. Patients who received alvimopan had a LOS that was 1.8 days shorter (p Conclusions When used in routine clinical practice, alvimopan was associated with a shorter LOS and limited but significant hospital cost savings. Both efficacy and effectiveness data support the use of alvimopan in routine clinical practice, and its use could be measured as a marker of higher quality care.