Understanding Patients' Experiences of Diagnosis and Treatment of Advanced Colorectal Cancer in a Safety-Net Hospital System: A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Greater understanding of barriers to screening of colorectal cancer among lower socioeconomic, particularly Hispanic, patients is needed to improve disparities in care. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to explore patients' perceptions and experiences of care seeking for colorectal cancer to identify barriers to early diagnosis and treatment. DESIGN: This explorative qualitative study was conducted as a focused ethnography of patients diagnosed with advanced-stage colorectal cancer. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at an urban safety-net hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty lower-income, primarily minority, patients diagnosed with stage III and IV colorectal cancer without prior colorectal cancer screening were selected. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were participants' perceptions and experiences of colorectal cancer and barriers they faced in seeking diagnosis and treatment RESULTS:: Data analysis yielded 4 themes consistently influencing participants' decisions to seek diagnosis and treatment: 1) limited resources for accessing care (structural barriers, including economic, health care and health educational resources); 2) (mis)understanding of symptoms by patients; misdiagnosis of symptoms, by physicians; 3) beliefs about illness and health, such as relying on faith, or self-care when symptoms developed; and 4) reactions to illness, including maintenance of masculinity, confusing interactions with physicians, embarrassment, and fear. These 4 themes describe factors on the structural, health care system, provider and patient level, that interact to make engaging in prevention foreign among this population, thus limiting early detection and treatment of colorectal cancer. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by selection bias and the lack of generalizability. CONCLUSION: Improving screening rates among lower-income populations requires addressing barriers across the multiple levels, structural, personal, health care system, that patients encounter in seeking care for colorectal cancer. Acknowledging the complex, multilevel influences impacting patient health care choices and behaviors allows for the development of culturally tailored interventions, and educational, financial, and community resources to decrease disparities in cancer screening and care and improve outcomes for these at-risk patients. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A473.

Differences of alternative methods of measuring abdominal wall hernia defect size: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the importance of defect size, there are no standardized recommendations on how to measure ventral hernias. Our aims were to determine (1) if any significant differences existed between various methods of measuring ventral hernias and (2) the effect of these methods of measurement on selection of mesh size. METHOD: A prospective study of all patients enrolled in a randomized trial assessing laparoscopic ventral hernia repair at a single institution from 3/2015 to 7/2016 was eligible for inclusion. Abdominal wall hernia defect size was determined by multiplying defect length and width obtained separately using each of five methods: radiographic (CT), intraoperative with abdomen desufflated, intraoperative with abdomen insufflated to 15 mmHg (intra-abdominal aspect), intraoperative with abdomen insufflated to 15 mmHg (extra-abdominal aspect), and clinical. The primary outcome was intraclass correlation between the five different methods of measurement for each patient. Secondary outcome was changes in mesh selection assuming a 5 cm overlap in each direction. RESULTS: Fifty patients met inclusion criteria for assessment. The five different measurement methods had an intraclass correlation for each patient of 0.533 (95% CI 0.373-0.697) (weak correlation) for length; 0.737 (95% CI 0.613-0.844) (moderate correlation) for width; and 0.684 (95% CI 0.544-0.810) (moderate correlation) for area. Different types of measurements affected mesh selection in up to 56% of cases. CONCLUSION: Among five common methods of measuring abdominal wall hernia defect, sizes are only weakly to moderately correlated. Further studies are needed to determine which method results in optimally sized abdominal wall prostheses and superior ventral hernia repair.

Decreasing Surgical Site Infections after Ventral Hernia Repair: A Quality-Improvement Initiative.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infections (SSIs) remain prevalent after ventral hernia repair (VHR). In 2013-2014, a safety-net academic hospital initiated a two-pronged quality-improvement (QI) project: (1) Development and implementation of evidence-based guidelines; and (2) creation of a specialized hernia clinic to manage challenging patients and complex ventral hernias. Our objective was to decrease SSI rates after elective VHR. METHODS: The primary outcome was SSI 30 days post-operatively, which was assessed in aggregate and with a stratified analysis based on case complexity using the χ2 test. RESULTS: A total of 399 patients in the pre-QI period and 390 patients in post-QI period (178 patients in general surgery clinics; 212 patients in the specialty hernia clinic) underwent VHR. Patients treated in the post-QI period were less likely to experience an SSI (13.5% vs. 1.5%; p < 0.001). On subgroup analysis of the post-QI clinics, specialty hernia clinic patients had an even lower risk of SSI than those in general surgery clinics (1.4% versus 1.7%). CONCLUSIONS: The QI initiatives of evidence-based guidelines and the specialty hernia clinic were associated with lower SSI rates. Differences in peri-operative management included differences in patient selection and pre-operative preparation and increased use of synthetic mesh and laparoscopy. Future studies must investigate the long-term outcomes of these initiatives.

Treatment delays of colon cancer in a safety-net hospital system.

BACKGROUND: Disparities in colon cancer survival have been reported to result from advanced stage at diagnosis and delayed therapy. We hypothesized that delays in treatment among medically underserved patients occur as a result of system-level barriers in a safety-net hospital system. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review and analysis of colon cancer patients treated in a large safety-net hospital system between May 2008 and May 2012. Data were collected on demographics, stage at diagnosis, time to surgery, time to adjuvant chemotherapy, and vital status. Regression analyses were performed to determine predictors of delays and failure to receive therapy. RESULTS: Of 248 patients treated for colon cancer, 56% (n = 140) had advanced disease at the time of presentation; furthermore, 29.1% of all colectomies for colon cancer were performed on an urgent or emergent basis. Thirty-six patients with stage III and IV disease did not receive chemotherapy (26%). Race, age, gender, and hospice care did not predict receipt of chemotherapy or delays to treatment. Patients with stage I colon cancer had a significantly longer interval between diagnosis and elective surgery when compared with patients with stage II, III, and IV colon cancer, with only 10% (n = 3) undergoing resection sooner than 6 wk after diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: One in three patients diagnosed with colon cancer in a large safety-net hospital system require urgent or emergent surgery, and one in two present with advanced disease. Reducing disparities should focus on earlier diagnosis of colon cancer and improving access to surgical specialists.

Is nighttime the right time? Risk of complications after laparoscopic cholecystectomy at night.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomies can be performed at night in high-volume acute care hospitals. We hypothesized that nonelective nighttime laparoscopic cholecystectomies are associated with increased postoperative complications. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a single-center retrospective review of consecutive laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients between October 2010 and May 2011 at a safety-net hospital in Houston, Texas. Data were collected on demographics, operative time, time of incision, length of stay, 30-day postoperative complications (ie, bile leak/biloma, common bile duct injury, retained stone, superficial surgical site infection, organ space abscess, and bleeding) and death. Statistical analyses were performed using STATA software (version 12; Stata Corp). RESULTS: During 8 months, 356 patients had nonelective laparoscopic cholecystectomies. A majority were female (n = 289 [81.1%]) and Hispanic (n = 299 [84%]). There were 108 (30%) nighttime operations. There were 29 complications in 18 patients; there were fewer daytime than nighttime patients who had at least 1 complication (4.0% vs 7.4%; p = 0.18). On multivariate analysis, age (odds ratio = 1.06 per year; 95% CI, 1.02-1.10; p = 0.002), case duration (odds ratio = 1.02 per minute; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02; p = 0.001), and nighttime surgery (odds ratio = 3.33; 95% CI, 1.14-9.74; p = 0.001) were associated with an increased risk of 30-day surgical complications. Length of stay was significantly longer for daytime than nighttime patients (median 3 vs 2 days; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Age, case duration, and nighttime laparoscopic cholecystectomy were predictive of increased 30-day surgical complications at a high-volume safety-net hospital. The small but increased risk of complications with nighttime laparoscopic cholecystectomy must be balanced against improved efficiency at a high-volume, resource-poor hospital.

Antimicrobial prophylaxis and infection surveillance in extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients: a multi-institutional survey of practice patterns.

The goal of this study was to characterize antimicrobial prophylaxis and infection surveillance practices at centers treating patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). A 37-question web-based survey was sent to all ECMO coordinators and directors at Extracorporeal Life Support Organization (ELSO) participating centers. Data were reported by center. The most complete response was used when multiple surveys were returned from a single center, and respondents' answers from the same center were analyzed for concordance. Responses were obtained from 76% of ELSO centers (132/173) and 41% of survey recipients (223/548). Most centers administer antibiotic prophylaxis (74%, 97/132), and almost half have a standardized protocol (49%, 64/132). Routine antibacterial but not antifungal prophylaxis is common (42%, 62/132 vs. 2/132, 2%). There is significant variation in the antibiotic choices and duration of prophylaxis, regardless of whether the center has a protocol or not. Almost half of centers (49%, 64/132) perform routine surveillance cultures but at variable intervals. There is significant heterogeneity in antibiotic prophylaxis and infection surveillance practice patterns among ELSO centers.