Does Delayed Operation Increase Morbidity and Mortality? An Analysis of Emergency General Surgery Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Early operation is assumed to improve outcomes after emergency general surgery (EGS) procedures; however, few data exist to inform this opinion. We aimed to (1) characterize time-to-operation patterns among EGS procedures and (2) test the association between timing and patient outcomes. We hypothesize that patients receiving later operations are at greater risk for mortality and morbidity. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study of the ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) data for adults ages 18-89 who underwent non-elective intra-abdominal operations (appendectomy, cholecystectomy, small bowel resection, lysis of adhesions, and colectomy) from 2015-2020. The primary outcome was 30-day postoperative mortality. Secondary outcomes were serious morbidity and all morbidity. Admission-to-operation timing was calculated and classified as early (≤ 48 hours) or late (> 48 hours). A multivariable logistic regression model adjusted risk estimates for age, comorbidities, frailty (mFI-5), and other confounders. RESULTS: Of 269,959 patients (mean age 47.0 years; 48.0 % male, 61.6% white), 88.7% underwent early operation, ranging from 70.36% (lysis of adhesions) to 98.67% (appendectomy). Unadjusted 30-day mortality was higher for late versus early operation (6.73% vs. 1.96%; p < 0.0001). After risk-adjustment, late operation significantly increased risk for 30-day mortality (OR 1.545, 95% CI 1.451 - 1.644), serious morbidity (OR 1.464, 95% CI 1.416-1.514), and all morbidity (OR 1.468, 95% CI 1.417-1.520). This mortality risk persisted for all EGS procedures; risk of serious and any morbidity persisted for all procedures except cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Late operation significantly increased risk for 30-day mortality, serious morbidity, and all morbidity across a variety of EGS procedures. We believe these findings will inform decisions regarding timing of EGS operations and allocation of surgical resources. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

National Databases for Assessment of Quality.

With the rise in the availability of large health care datasets, database research has become an important tool for colorectal surgeon to assess health care quality and implement practice changes. In this chapter, we will discuss the benefits and drawbacks of database research for quality improvement, review common markers of quality for colorectal surgery, provide an overview of frequently used datasets (including Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program, National Surgical Quality Improvement Project, National Cancer Database, National Inpatient Sample, Medicare Data, and Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results), and look ahead to the future of database research for the improvement of quality.

Does Implementation of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Protocols in Colorectal Surgery Improve Patient Outcomes?

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols are multimodal perioperative care pathways designed to accelerate recovery by minimizing the physiologic stress of a surgical procedure. Benefits of ERAS implementation in colorectal surgery include reduced length of stay and decreased complications without an increase in readmissions. Though there is evidence associating individual ERAS protocol elements (e.g., preoperative carbohydrate loading, judicious perioperative fluid administration, and early initiation of postoperative nutrition) with improved outcomes, ensuring high compliance with all elements of an ERAS protocol will maximize benefits to the patient. After ERAS implementation, data collection on protocol process measures can help providers target education and interventions to improve protocol compliance and patient outcomes.

Optimizing the Feasibility and Scalability of a Geriatric Surgery Quality Improvement Initiative.

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery is a multidisciplinary stakeholder group that aims to systematically improve the surgical care of older adults by establishing a verifiable quality improvement program with standards based on best evidence. Prior work confirmed the validity of a preliminary set of 308 standards to improve the quality of geriatric surgery, but concerns exist as to whether the standards are feasible for hospitals to implement. OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to utilize data gained from a multi-institutional survey and interview to improve the scalability and generalizability of a geriatric quality improvement program. METHODS: Using a survey followed by a targeted debrief interview, 15 hospitals gathered an interdisciplinary panel to answer whether each standard was already in place at their institution, and if not, the perceived difficulty of implementation according to a five-point Likert scale (from 1 [very easy] to 5 [very difficult]). The standards were then placed into categories according to the hospital responses. Standards were designated "duplicative" if 11 or more hospitals reported baseline implementation, "prohibitively difficult" if 6 or more hospitals rated the standard as such, and "high potential" if they were neither duplicative nor difficult. A targeted debrief interview was then conducted with each participating hospital. RESULTS: Fifteen participating hospitals evaluated the feasibility of 108 standards and found 28 (26%) duplicative, 35 (32%) too difficult, and 45 (42%) high potential. Of the 108 standards, 49 (45%) were selected for the next iteration of standards, and 59 were removed. Among the standards that were removed, the majority (64%) were rated duplicative and/or difficult. CONCLUSION: A multi-institutional survey and interview successfully identified care standards that were redundant or too difficult to implement on the hospital level. These data will help improve the generalizability and scalability of the program while maintaining the overall goal of improving care. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1074-1078, 2019.

Adherence to Enhanced Recovery Protocols in NSQIP and Association With Colectomy Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of protocol adherence on length of stay (LOS) and recovery-specific outcomes after colectomy. BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) may decrease postoperative morbidity and LOS; however, the effect of overall protocol adherence remains unclear. METHODS: Using American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program colectomy data (July 2014-December 2015) and 13 novel ERP variables, propensity scores were constructed for low (0-5), moderate (6-9), and high adherence (10-13 components). Prolonged LOS (>75th percentile, uncomplicated cases) was modeled with multivariable logistic regression with robust standard errors, adjusted for hospital-level clustering and propensity score. Secondary recovery-specific outcomes were modeled with negative binomial regression. Subgroup analysis was conducted on uncomplicated cases. RESULTS: Among 8139 elective colectomies at 113 hospitals, LOS increased with decreasing adherence (4.3 days [SD 3.3] high adherence vs 7.8 [SD 6.8] low adherence; P < 0.0001). High adherence was associated with fewer complications, including postoperative ileus, compared with moderate (P < 0.0001) and low adherence (P < 0.0001). High-adherence patients achieved recovery milestones earlier (vs low adherence), with return of bowel function at 1.9 (vs 3.7) days, tolerance of diet at 2.4 (vs 5.4) days, and oral pain control at 2.7 (vs 5.0) days (P < 0.0001). Risk-adjusted odds of prolonged LOS were significantly increased for low (odds ratio 2.7, 95% confidence interval 2.0-3.6) and moderate-adherence (odds ratio 1.7, 95% confidence interval 1.4-2.1) groups. In a negative binomial regression, time to recovery was 60% to 95% longer for low versus high adherence (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large, multi-institutional North American data registry, high adherence to ERPs was associated with earlier recovery, decreased complications, and shorter LOS. ERPs can improve outcomes; however, benefits correlate with adherence.

Trends in perioperative outcomes of hospitals performing major cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Cancer surgery outcomes at National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers (NCI-CCs) have been shown to vary, and have not been uniformly better than outcomes among non-NCI-CCs. We aimed to assess whether NCI-CCs have improved their short-term outcomes over time and whether variation across these centers has changed. METHODS: Patients who underwent colectomy, esophagectomy, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, and proctectomy for cancer were identified from the 2010 to 2016 American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry. Hospital trends in risk-adjusted, smoothed observed-to-expected ratios were assessed to evaluate improvement and variation in perioperative complications, stratified by NCI-CC status. RESULTS: Complications occurred in 18.8% of 204 732 patients who underwent major cancer operations at 645 hospitals, and complications occurred in 19.9% of 60,903 patients at 54 NCI-CCs studied. More NCI-CCs than non-NCI-CCs improved over the period (85.2% vs 58.4%, P < 0.001; relative risk [RR] 1.46, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.28-1.66); this remained significant after adjusting for years of participation (RR 1.33, 95% CI, 1.17-1.51). Variation in performance remained unchanged over time. CONCLUSION: NCI-CCs were detected to have improved over a contemporary seven-year period and to have improved more than non-NCI-CCs. However, NCI-CCs do not uniformly outperform non-NCI-CCs, and variation in perioperative outcomes remains, warranting continued quality improvement efforts targeting cancer-specific operations.

Correction to: A systematic review of patient perspectives on surveillance after colorectal cancer treatment.

The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The online supplementary files are missing. The complete version of online supplementary materials are published with this erratum.

Effect of Diagnosis on Outcomes in the Setting of Enhanced Recovery Protocols.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of enhanced recovery protocols in colectomy reduces length of stay and morbidity, but it remains unknown whether benefits vary by clinical diagnosis. OBJECTIVE: Outcomes after colectomy in the setting of enhanced recovery protocols were compared for 3 diagnoses: 1) neoplasm, 2) diverticulitis, and 3) IBD. DESIGN: This was a retrospective registry-based cohort study. SETTINGS: Novel enhanced recovery variables were released in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in 2014. PATIENTS: Patients with enhanced recovery variable data undergoing elective colectomy (July 2014 to December 2015) for neoplasm, diverticulitis, or IBD were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome of interest was prolonged length of stay. Additional outcomes included surgical site infection, death/serious morbidity, reoperation, readmission, and days to achieve per os pain control, tolerance of a diet, and return of bowel function. RESULTS: We identified 4620 patients with neoplasm, 1730 patients with diverticulitis, and 593 patients with IBD. Patients undergoing colectomy for IBD were more likely to have prolonged length of stay (OR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.46-2.69), death/serious morbidity (OR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.13-2.32), and readmission (OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.15-2.08) compared with patients with neoplasm. Patients with IBD took longer than patients with neoplasm or diverticulitis to achieve per os pain control (mean, 4.2 days vs 3.4 and 3.5 days, p < 0.001) and tolerate a diet (mean, 4.1 days vs 3.7 and 3.5 days, p < 0.001). No statistically significant differences in outcomes between patients with neoplasm and diverticulitis were seen. LIMITATIONS: There may be heterogeneity among implemented enhanced recovery protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing colectomy for neoplasm and diverticulitis have improved outcomes in comparison with patients undergoing colectomy for IBD. Knowledge of expected outcomes for patients with different diagnoses may inform clinician and patient expectations. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A623.

Application of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Methodology to a Large Multidisciplinary Stakeholder Group Evaluating the Validity and Feasibility of Patient-Centered Standards in Geriatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To explore (1) differences in validity and feasibility ratings for geriatric surgical standards across a diverse stakeholder group (surgeons vs. nonsurgeons, health care providers vs. nonproviders, including patient-family, advocacy, and regulatory agencies); (2) whether three multidisciplinary discussion subgroups would reach similar conclusions. DATA SOURCE/STUDY SETTING: Primary data (ratings) were reported from 58 stakeholder organizations. STUDY DESIGN: An adaptation of the RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Methodology (RAM) process was conducted in May 2016. DATA COLLECTION/EXTRACTION METHODS: Stakeholders self-administered ratings on paper, returned via mail (Round 1) and in-person (Round 2). PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: In Round 1, surgeons rated standards more critically (91.2 percent valid; 64.9 percent feasible) than nonsurgeons (100 percent valid; 87.0 percent feasible) but increased ratings in Round 2 (98.7 percent valid; 90.6 percent feasible), aligning with nonsurgeons (99.7 percent valid; 96.1 percent feasible). Three parallel subgroups rated validity at 96.8 percent (group 1), 100 percent (group 2), and 97.4 percent (group 3). Feasibility ratings were 76.9 percent (group 1), 96.1 percent (group 2), and 92.2 percent (group 3). CONCLUSIONS: There are differences in validity and feasibility ratings by health professions, with surgeons rating standards more critically than nonsurgeons. However, three separate discussion subgroups rated a high proportion (96-100 percent) of standards as valid, indicating the RAM can be successfully applied to a large stakeholder group.

Association of an Enhanced Recovery Pilot With Length of Stay in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

Importance: Enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) are standardized care plans of best practices that can decrease morbidity and length of stay (LOS). However, many hospitals need help with implementation. The Enhanced Recovery in National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ERIN) pilot was designed to support ERP implementation. Objective: To evaluate the association of the ERIN pilot with LOS after colectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants: Using a difference-in-differences design, pilot LOS before and after ERP implementation was compared with matched controls in a hierarchical model, adjusting for case mix and random effects of hospitals and matched pairs. The setting was 15 hospitals of varied size and academic status from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Preimplementation and postimplementation colectomy cases (July 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015) were collected using novel ERIN variables. Emergency and septic cases were excluded. A propensity score match identified a 2:1 control cohort of patients undergoing colectomy at non-ERIN hospitals. Interventions: Pilot hospitals developed and implemented ERPs that included expert guidance, multidisciplinary teams, data audits, and opportunities for collaboration. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was LOS, and the secondary outcome was serious morbidity or mortality composite. Results: There were 4975 colectomies performed by 15 ERIN pilot hospitals (3437 before implementation and 1538 after implementation) compared with a control cohort of 9950 colectomies (4726 before implementation and 5224 after implementation). The mean LOS decreased by 1.7 days in the pilot (6.9 [interquartile range (IQR), 4-8] days before implementation vs 5.2 [IQR, 3-6] days after implementation, P < .001) compared with 0.4 day in controls (6.4 [IQR, 4-7] days before implementation vs 6.0 [IQR, 3-7] days after implementation, P < .001). Readmission did not differ pre-post for the pilot or controls. Serious morbidity or mortality decreased for pilot participants (485 [14.1%] before implementation vs 162 [10.5%] after implementation, P < .001), with no difference in controls, and remained significant after risk adjustment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96). After adjusting for differences in case mix and for clustering in hospitals and matched pairs, the adjusted difference-in-differences model demonstrated a decrease in LOS by 1.1 days in the pilot over controls (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Participating ERIN pilot hospitals achieved shorter LOS and decreased complications after elective colectomy, without increasing readmissions. The ability to implement ERPs across hospitals of varied size and resources is essential. Lessons from the ERIN pilot may inform efforts to scale this effective and evidence-based intervention.

Procedure-Specific Trends in Surgical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Quality improvement efforts have generally focused on hospital benchmarking, and processes and outcomes shared among all operations. However, quality improvement could be inconsistent across different types of operations. The objective of this study was to identify operations needing additional concerted quality improvement efforts by examining their outcomes trends. STUDY DESIGN: Ten procedures (colectomy, esophagectomy, hepatectomy, hysterectomy, pancreatectomy, proctectomy, total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, thyroidectomy, and ventral hernia repair) commonly accrued into the American College of Surgeons NSQIP between 2008 and 2015 were included. Trends in risk-adjusted, standardized, smoothed rates were constructed for each procedure across 6 outcomes (mortality, pneumonia, renal failure, surgical site infection, unplanned intubation, and urinary tract infection [UTI]). RESULTS: Of 1,255,575 operations analyzed, the overall unadjusted rate for mortality across all 10 procedures was 1.08%, for pneumonia 1.44%, for renal failure 0.67%, for surgical site infection 5.28%, for unplanned intubation 1.11%, and for UTI 1.86%. Hepatectomy demonstrated the greatest improvement across outcomes (4 of 6 outcomes; 362 adverse events avoided out of 10,000 procedures), and UTI demonstrated the greatest improvement across procedures (8 of 10 procedures; 989 adverse events avoided out of 10,000). For pancreatectomy, rates of mortality, unplanned intubation, and UTI improved, but surgical site infection rates were detected to have significantly increased (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Hepatectomy was detected to have improved across the greatest number of outcomes, and UTI rates improved significantly across the greatest number of procedures. Surgical site infection rates after pancreatectomy, however, were detected to have increased, identifying an urgent need for additional concerted quality improvement efforts.

Hospital Standards to Promote Optimal Surgical Care of the Older Adult: A Report From the Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to establish high-quality, valid standards to improve surgical care of the older adult. BACKGROUND: The aging population increases demand for high-quality surgical care. Building upon prior guidelines, quality indicators, and pilot projects, the Coalition for Quality in Geriatric Surgery (CQGS) includes 58 diverse stakeholder organizations committed to improving geriatric surgery. METHODS: Using a modified RAND-UCLA Appropriateness Methodology, 44 of 58 CQGS Stakeholders twice rated validity (primary outcome) and feasibility for 308 standards, ranging from goals and decision-making, pre-operative assessment and optimization, perioperative and postoperative care, to transitions of care beyond the acute care hospital. RESULTS: Three hundred six of 308 (99%) standards were rated as valid to improve quality of geriatric surgery. There were 4 sections. Section 1 included 157 (57%) standards and focused on goals and decision-making, preoperative optimization, and transitions into and out of the hospital. Section 2 included 84 (27.3%) standards focused on in-hospital care, across the immediate preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases. Section 3 included 59 (19.1%) standards about program management, including personnel and committee structure, credentialing, and education. Section 4 included 8 (2.6%) standards establishing overarching concepts for data collection and patient follow-up. Two hundred ninety of 308 standards (94.2%) were rated as feasible; 18 (5.8%) were rated as uncertain in feasibility. CONCLUSIONS: CQGS Stakeholders rated the vast majority of standards of care as highly valid (99%) and feasible (94%) for improving the quality of surgical care provided to older adults. Future work will focus on a pilot phase to better understand and address challenges to implementation of the standards.

Postoperative Delirium as a Target for Surgical Quality Improvement.

OBJECTIVE: To explore hospital-level variation in postoperative delirium using a multi-institutional data source. BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium is closely related to serious morbidity, disability, and death in older adults. Yet, surgeons and hospitals rarely measure delirium rates, which limits quality improvement efforts. METHODS: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) Geriatric Surgery Pilot (2014 to 2015) collects geriatric-specific variables, including postoperative delirium using a standardized definition. Hierarchical logistic regression models, adjusted for case mix [Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code] and patient risk factors, yielded risk-adjusted and smoothed odds ratios (ORs) for hospital performance. Model performance was assessed with Hosmer-Lemeshow (HL) statistic and c-statistics, and compared across surgical specialties. RESULTS: Twenty thousand two hundred twelve older adults (≥65 years) underwent inpatient operations at 30 hospitals. Postoperative delirium occurred in 2427 patients (12.0%) with variation across specialties, from 4.7% in gynecology to 13.7% in cardiothoracic surgery. Hierarchical modeling with 20 risk factors (HL = 9.423, P = 0.31; c-statistic 0.86) identified 13 hospitals as statistical outliers (5 good, 8 poor performers). Per hospital, the median risk-adjusted delirium rate was 10.4% (range 3.2% to 27.5%). Operation-specific risk and preoperative cognitive impairment (OR 2.9, 95% confidence interval 2.5-3.5) were the strongest predictors. The model performed well across surgical specialties (orthopedic, general surgery, and vascular surgery). CONCLUSION: Rates of postoperative delirium varied 8.5-fold across hospitals, and can feasibly be measured in surgical quality datasets. The model performed well with 10 to 12 variables and demonstrated applicability across surgical specialties. Such efforts are critical to better tailor quality improvement to older surgical patients.

Optimizing Surgical Quality Datasets to Care for Older Adults: Lessons from the American College of Surgeons NSQIP Geriatric Surgery Pilot.

BACKGROUND: Surgical quality datasets can be better tailored toward older adults. The American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP Geriatric Surgery Pilot collected risk factors and outcomes in 4 geriatric-specific domains: cognition, decision-making, function, and mobility. This study evaluated the contributions of geriatric-specific factors to risk adjustment in modeling 30-day outcomes and geriatric-specific outcomes (postoperative delirium, new mobility aid use, functional decline, and pressure ulcers). STUDY DESIGN: Using ACS NSQIP Geriatric Surgery Pilot data (January 2014 to December 2016), 7 geriatric-specific risk factors were evaluated for selection in 14 logistic models (morbidities/mortality) in general-vascular and orthopaedic surgery subgroups. Hierarchical models evaluated 4 geriatric-specific outcomes, adjusting for hospitals-level effects and including Bayesian-type shrinkage, to estimate hospital performance. RESULTS: There were 36,399 older adults who underwent operations at 31 hospitals in the ACS NSQIP Geriatric Surgery Pilot. Geriatric-specific risk factors were selected in 10 of 14 models in both general-vascular and orthopaedic surgery subgroups. After risk adjustment, surrogate consent (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.3 to 1.8) and use of a mobility aid (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.4) increased the risk for serious morbidity or mortality in the general-vascular cohort. Geriatric-specific factors were selected in all 4 geriatric-specific outcomes models. Rates of geriatric-specific outcomes were: postoperative delirium in 12.1% (n = 3,650), functional decline in 42.9% (n = 13,000), new mobility aid in 29.7% (n = 9,257), and new or worsened pressure ulcers in 1.7% (n = 527). CONCLUSIONS: Geriatric-specific risk factors are important for patient-centered care and contribute to risk adjustment in modeling traditional and geriatric-specific outcomes. To provide optimal patient care for older adults, surgical datasets should collect measures that address cognition, decision-making, mobility, and function.

Concurrent bariatric operations and association with perioperative outcomes: registry based cohort study.

Objective To determine whether perioperative outcomes differ between patients undergoing concurrent compared with non-concurrent bariatric operations in the USA.Design Retrospective, propensity score matched cohort study.Setting Hospitals in the US accredited by the American College of Surgeons' metabolic and bariatric surgery accreditation and quality improvement program.Participants 513 167 patients undergoing bariatric operations between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016.Main outcome measures The primary outcome measure was a composite of 30 day death, morbidity, readmission, reoperation, anastomotic or staple line leak, and bleeding events. Operative duration and lengths of stay were also assessed. Operations were defined as concurrent if they overlapped by 60 or more minutes or in their entirety.Results In this study of 513 167 operations, 739 (29.5%) surgeons at 483 (57.8%) hospitals performed 6087 (1.2%) concurrent operations. The most frequently performed concurrent bariatric operations were sleeve gastrectomy (n=3250, 53.4%) and Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (n=1601, 26.3%). Concurrent operations were more often performed at large academic medical centers with higher operative volumes and numbers of trainees and by higher volume surgeons. Compared with non-concurrent operations, concurrent operations lasted a median of 34 minutes longer (P<0.001) and resulted in 0.3 days longer average length of stay (P<0.001). Perioperative adverse events were not observed to more likely occur in concurrent compared with non-concurrent operations (7.5% v 7.4%; relative risk 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.90 to 1.15; P=0.84).Conclusions Concurrent bariatric operations occurred infrequently, but when they did, there was no observable increased risk for adverse perioperative outcomes compared with non-concurrent operations. These results, however, do not argue against improved and more meaningful disclosure of concurrent surgery practices.

Outcomes of Concurrent Operations: Results From the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether concurrently performed operations are associated with an increased risk for adverse events. BACKGROUND: Concurrent operations occur when a surgeon is simultaneously responsible for critical portions of 2 or more operations. How this practice affects patient outcomes is unknown. METHODS: Using American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data from 2014 to 2015, operations were considered concurrent if they overlapped by ≥60 minutes or in their entirety. Propensity-score-matched cohorts were constructed to compare death or serious morbidity (DSM), unplanned reoperation, and unplanned readmission in concurrent versus non-concurrent operations. Multilevel hierarchical regression was used to account for the clustered nature of the data while controlling for procedure and case mix. RESULTS: There were 1430 (32.3%) surgeons from 390 (77.7%) hospitals who performed 12,010 (2.3%) concurrent operations. Plastic surgery (n = 393 [13.7%]), otolaryngology (n = 470 [11.2%]), and neurosurgery (n = 2067 [8.4%]) were specialties with the highest proportion of concurrent operations. Spine procedures were the most frequent concurrent procedures overall (n = 2059/12,010 [17.1%]). Unadjusted rates of DSM (9.0% vs 7.1%; P < 0.001), reoperation (3.6% vs 2.7%; P < 0.001), and readmission (6.9% vs 5.1%; P < 0.001) were greater in the concurrent operation cohort versus the non-concurrent. After propensity score matching and risk-adjustment, there was no significant association of concurrence with DSM (odds ratio [OR] 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.96-1.21), reoperation (OR 1.16; 95% CI 0.96-1.40), or readmission (OR 1.14; 95% CI 0.99-1.29). CONCLUSIONS: In these analyses, concurrent operations were not detected to increase the risk for adverse outcomes. These results do not lessen the need for further studies, continuous self-regulation and proactive disclosure to patients.

A systematic review of patient perspectives on surveillance after colorectal cancer treatment.

PURPOSE: Surveillance after colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment is routine, but intensive follow-up may offer little-to-no overall survival benefit. Given the growing population of CRC survivors, we aimed to systematically evaluate the literature for the patient perspective on two questions: (1) How do CRC patients perceive routine surveillance following curative treatment and what do they expect to gain from their surveillance testing or visits? (2) Which providers (specialists, nursing, primary care) are preferred by CRC survivors to guide post-treatment surveillance? METHODS: Systematic searches of PubMed MEDLINE, Embase, the CENTRAL Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were conducted. Studies were screened for inclusion by two reviewers, with discrepancies adjudicated by a third reviewer. Data were abstracted and evaluated utilizing validated reporting tools (CONSORT, STROBE, CASP) appropriate to study design. RESULTS: Citations (3691) were screened, 91 full-text articles reviewed, and 23 studies included in the final review: 15 quantitative and 8 qualitative. Overall, 12 studies indicated CRC patients perceive routine surveillance positively, expecting to gain reassurance of continued disease suppression. Negative perceptions described in six studies included anxiety and dissatisfaction related to quality of life or psychosocial issues during follow-up. Although 5 studies supported specialist-led care, 9 studies indicated patient willingness to have follow-up with non-specialist providers (primary care or nursing). CONCLUSIONS: Patients' perceptions of follow-up after CRC are predominantly positive, although unmet needs included psychosocial support and quality of life. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: Survivors perceived follow-up as reassuring, however, surveillance care should be more informative and focused on survivor-specific needs.