Evidence Review for the American College of Surgeons Quality Verification Part III: Standardization, Protocols, and Achieving Better Outcomes for Patient Care.

BACKGROUND: After decades of experience supporting surgical quality and safety by the American College of Surgeons, the ACS Quality Verification Program (ACS QVP) was developed to help hospitals improve surgical quality and safety. This review is the final installment of a three-part review aimed to synthesize evidence supporting the main principles of the ACS QVP. STUDY DESIGN: Evidence was systematically reviewed for three principles: standardized team-based care across five phases of surgical care, disease-based management, and external regulatory review. MEDLINE was searched for articles published from inception to January 2019 and two reviewers independently screened studies for inclusion in a hierarchical fashion, extracted data, and summarized results in a narrative fashion. A total of 5,237 studies across these three topics were identified. Studies were included if they evaluated the relationship between the standard of interest and patient-level or organization measures within the last twenty years. RESULTS: After applying inclusion criteria, a total of 150 studies in systematic reviews and primary studies were included for assessment. Despite institutional variation in standardized clinical pathways, evidence demonstrated improved outcomes such as reduced length of stay (LOS), costs, and complications. Evidence for multidisciplinary disease-based care protocols was mixed, though trended towards improving patient outcomes such as reduced LOS and readmissions. Similarly, the evidence for accreditation and adherence to external process measures was also mixed, though several studies demonstrated the benefit of accreditation programs on patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The identified literature supports the importance of standardized multidisciplinary and disease-based processes and external regulatory systems to improve quality of care.

Identifying Population-Level and Within-Hospital Disparities in Surgical Care.

INTRODUCTION: The lack of consensus on equity measurement and its incorporation into quality-assessment programs at the hospital and system levels may be a barrier to addressing disparities in surgical care. This study aimed to identify population-level and within-hospital differences in the quality of surgical care provision. METHODS: The analysis included 657 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participating hospitals with over 4 million patients (2014-2018). Multi-level random slope, random intercept modeling was used to examine for population-level and in-hospital disparities. Disparities in surgical care by Area Deprivation Index (ADI), race, and ethnicity were analyzed for five measures: all-case inpatient mortality, all-case urgent readmission, all-case postoperative surgical site infection, colectomy mortality, and spine surgery complications. RESULTS: Population-level disparities were identified across all measures by ADI, two measures for Black race (all-case readmissions and spine surgery complications), and none for Hispanic ethnicity. Disparities remained significant in the adjusted models. Prior to risk-adjustment, in all measures examined, within-hospital disparities were detected in: 25.8-99.8% of hospitals for ADI, 0-6.1% of hospitals for Black race, and 0-0.8% of hospitals for Hispanic ethnicity. Following risk-adjustment, in all measures examined, fewer than 1.1% of hospitals demonstrated disparities by ADI, race, or ethnicity. CONCLUSIONS: Following risk adjustment, very few hospitals demonstrated significant disparities in care. Disparities were more frequently detected by ADI than by race and ethnicity. The lack of substantial in-hospital disparities may be due to the use of postoperative metrics, small sample sizes, the risk adjustment methodology, and healthcare segregation. Further work should examine surgical access and healthcare segregation.

Changes in surgical mortality during COVID-19 pandemic by patients' race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status among US older adults: a quasi-experimental event study model.

OBJECTIVES: To examine changes in the 30-day surgical mortality rate after common surgical procedures during the COVID-19 pandemic and investigate whether its impact varies by urgency of surgery or patient race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status. DESIGN: We used a quasi-experimental event study design to examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical mortality rate, using patients who received the same procedure in the prepandemic years (2016-2019) as the control, adjusting for patient characteristics and hospital fixed effects (effectively comparing patients treated at the same hospital). We conducted stratified analyses by procedure urgency, patient race, ethnicity and socioeconomic status (dual-Medicaid status and median household income). SETTING: Acute care hospitals in the USA. PARTICIPANTS: Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65-99 years who underwent one of 14 common surgical procedures from 1 January 2016 to 31 December 2020. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: 30-day postoperative mortality rate. RESULTS: Our sample included 3 620 689 patients. Surgical mortality was higher during the pandemic, with peak mortality observed in April 2020 (adjusted risk difference (aRD) +0.95 percentage points (pp); 95% CI +0.76 to +1.26 pp; p<0.001) and mortality remained elevated through 2020. The effect of the pandemic on mortality was larger for non-elective (vs elective) procedures (April 2020: aRD +0.44 pp (+0.16 to +0.72 pp); p=0.002 for elective; aRD +1.65 pp (+1.00, +2.30 pp); p<0.001 for non-elective). We found no evidence that the pandemic mortality varied by patients' race and ethnicity (p for interaction=0.29), or socioeconomic status (p for interaction=0.49). CONCLUSIONS: 30-day surgical mortality during the COVID-19 pandemic peaked in April 2020 and remained elevated until the end of the year. The influence of the pandemic on surgical mortality did not vary by patient race and ethnicity or socioeconomic status, indicating that once patients were able to access care and undergo surgery, surgical mortality was similar across groups.

"Knowing I Had Someone to Turn to Was a Great Feeling": Mentoring Rural-Appalachian STEM Students.

Post-secondary students benefit from mentorships, which provide both emotional and academic support tailored to the unique challenges they face. STEM students, and, in particular, those with historically marginalized identities, have unique strengths and face distinct barriers that can be ameliorated by careful, knowledgeable, and well-situated mentoring relationships. With that in mind, we conducted a narrative case study with 10 rural-Appalachian STEM majors enrolled in an NSF-funded mentoring program, intending to collect stories of their impactful experiences with their mentors. We utilized the narrative reconstruction process, and, in so doing, identified five major themes related to the importance of mentor assignment and the impact of mentors' characteristics and skills related to empathy, consistency, active listening, and teaching. We situate our findings within the existing literature and provide implications for scholars and practitioners who work with mentoring programs dedicated to working with Appalachian communities.

Association between patient-surgeon gender concordance and mortality after surgery in the United States: retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether patient-surgeon gender concordance is associated with mortality of patients after surgery in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING: Acute care hospitals in the US. PARTICIPANTS: 100% of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 65-99 years who had one of 14 major elective or non-elective (emergent or urgent) surgeries in 2016-19. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality after surgery, defined as death within 30 days of the operation. Adjustments were made for patient and surgeon characteristics and hospital fixed effects (effectively comparing patients within the same hospital). RESULTS: Among 2 902 756 patients who had surgery, 1 287 845 (44.4%) had operations done by surgeons of the same gender (1 201 712 (41.4%) male patient and male surgeon, 86 133 (3.0%) female patient and female surgeon) and 1 614 911 (55.6%) were by surgeons of different gender (52 944 (1.8%) male patient and female surgeon, 1 561 967 (53.8%) female patient and male surgeon). Adjusted 30 day mortality after surgery was 2.0% for male patient-male surgeon dyads, 1.7% for male patient-female surgeon dyads, 1.5% for female patient-male surgeon dyads, and 1.3% for female patient-female surgeon dyads. Patient-surgeon gender concordance was associated with a slightly lower mortality for female patients (adjusted risk difference -0.2 percentage point (95% confidence interval -0.3 to -0.1); P<0.001), but a higher mortality for male patients (0.3 (0.2 to 0.5); P<0.001) for elective procedures, although the difference was small and not clinically meaningful. No evidence suggests that operative mortality differed by patient-surgeon gender concordance for non-elective procedures. CONCLUSIONS: Post-operative mortality rates were similar (ie, the difference was small and not clinically meaningful) among the four types of patient-surgeon gender dyads.

Dual antiplatelet management in the perioperative period: updated and expanded systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet agents are central in the management of vascular disease. The use of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) for the management of thromboembolic complications must be weighed against bleeding risk in the perioperative setting. This balance is critical in patients undergoing cardiac or non-cardiac surgery. The management of patients on DAPT for any indication (including stents) is not clear and there is limited evidence to guide decision-making. This review summarizes current evidence since 2015 regarding the occurrence of major adverse events associated with continuing, suspending, or varying DAPT in the perioperative period. METHODS: A research librarian searched PubMed and Cochrane from November 30, 2015 to May 17, 2022, for relevant terms regarding adult patients on DAPT for any reason undergoing surgery, with a perioperative variation in DAPT strategy. Outcomes of interest included the occurrence of major adverse cardiac events, major adverse limb events, all-cause death, major bleeding, and reoperation. We considered withdrawal or discontinuation of DAPT as stopping either aspirin or a P2Y12 inhibitor or both agents; continuation of DAPT indicates that both drugs were given in the specified timeframe. RESULTS: Eighteen observational studies met the inclusion criteria. No RCTs were identified, and no studies were judged to be at low risk of bias. Twelve studies reported on CABG. Withholding DAPT therapy for more than 2 days was associated with less blood loss and a slight trend favoring less transfusion and surgical re-exploration. Among five observational CABG studies, there were no statistically significant differences in patient death across DAPT management strategies. Few studies reported cardiac outcomes. The remaining studies, which were about procedures other than exclusively CABG, demonstrated mixed findings with respect to DAPT strategy, bleeding, and ischemic outcomes. CONCLUSION: The evidence base on the benefits and risks of different perioperative DAPT strategies for patients with stents is extremely limited. The strongest signal, which was still judged as low certainty evidence, is that suspension of DAPT for greater than 2 days prior to CABG surgery is associated with less bleeding, transfusions, and re-explorations. Different DAPT strategies' association with other outcomes of interest, such as MACE, remains uncertain. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: A preregistered protocol for this review can be found on the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of systematic reviews ( http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ ; registration number: CRD42022371032).

Development and Validation of a Novel Literature-Based Method to Identify Disparity-Sensitive Surgical Quality Metrics.

BACKGROUND: Disparity in surgical care impedes the delivery of uniformly high-quality care. Metrics that quantify disparity in care can help identify areas for needed intervention. A literature-based Disparity-Sensitive Score (DSS) system for surgical care was adapted by the Metrics for Equitable Access and Care in Surgery (MEASUR) group. The alignment between the MEASUR DSS and Delphi ratings of an expert advisory panel (EAP) regarding the disparity sensitivity of surgical quality metrics was assessed. STUDY DESIGN: Using DSS criteria MEASUR co-investigators scored 534 surgical metrics which were subsequently rated by the EAP. All scores were converted to a 9-point scale. Agreement between the new measurement technique (ie DSS) and an established subjective technique (ie importance and validity ratings) were assessed using the Bland-Altman method, adjusting for the linear relationship between the paired difference and the paired average. The limit of agreement (LOA) was set at 1.96 SD (95%). RESULTS: The percentage of DSS scores inside the LOA was 96.8% (LOA, 0.02 points) for the importance rating and 94.6% (LOA, 1.5 points) for the validity rating. In comparison, 94.4% of the 2 subjective EAP ratings were inside the LOA (0.7 points). CONCLUSIONS: Applying the MEASUR DSS criteria using available literature allowed for identification of disparity-sensitive surgical metrics. The results suggest that this literature-based method of selecting quality metrics may be comparable to more complex consensus-based Delphi methods. In fields with robust literature, literature-based composite scores may be used to select quality metrics rather than assembling consensus panels.

Endoscopic therapies for patients with obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is a major threat to public health and traditional bariatric surgery continues to have low utilization. Endoscopic treatments for obesity have emerged that offer less risk, but questions remain regarding efficacy, durability, and safety. We compared the efficacy of endoscopic bariatric procedures as compared to other existing treatments. METHODS: A literature search of Embase, Cochrane Central, and Pubmed was conducted from January 1, 2014 to December 7, 2021, including endoscopic bariatric therapies that were FDA or CE approved at the time of search to non-endoscopic treatments. Thirty-seven studies involving 15,639 patients were included. Primary outcomes included % total body weight loss (%TBWL), % excess body weight loss (%EBWL), and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included quality of life data and differences in hemoglobin A1C levels. Strength of clinical trial and observational data were graded according to the Cochrane methods. RESULTS: Intragastric balloons achieved greater %TBWL with a range of 7.6-14.1% compared to 3.3-6.7% with lifestyle modification at 6 months, and 7.5-14.0% compared to 3.1-7.9%, respectively, at 12 months. When endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) was compared to laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG), ESG had less %TBWL at 4.7-14.4% compared to 18.8-26.5% after LSG at 6 months, and 4.5-18.6% as compared to 28.4-29.3%, respectively, at 12 months. For the AspireAssist, there was greater %TBWL with aspiration therapy compared to lifestyle modification at 12 months, 12.1-18.3% TBWL versus 3.5-5.9% TBWL, respectively. All endoscopic interventions had higher adverse events rates compared to lifestyle modification. CONCLUSION: This review is the first to evaluate various endoscopic bariatric therapies using only RCTs and observational studies for evaluation of weight loss compared with conservative management, lifestyle modification, and bariatric surgery. Endoscopic therapies result in greater weight loss compared to lifestyle modification, but not as much as bariatric surgery. Endoscopic therapies may be beneficial as an alternative to bariatric surgery.

Understanding group leader affect as a factor for career education programming.

The purpose of this study was to explore how group leader affect impacted facilitation of a career education program. Through a case study design, data were gathered via focus groups and blog posts from 16 program staff members. Five major themes were derived, highlighting group leader affect and experience: Emotions During Intervention, Flexibility, Student Engagement and Connections, Support from Program Staff, and School Culture. The findings encouraged career educators to remain flexible when delivering programming, to consider regular evaluations of affect throughout career programming, and to acknowledge the reciprocity of engagement, affect, and programmatic buy-in between facilitators and participants.

Le but de cette étude était d'explorer comment l'affect du leader de groupe influence l'impact d'un programme d'éducation au choix de carrière. Par le biais d'une étude de cas, les données ont été recueillies par des focus group et des post dans des blogs de 16 membres du personnel du programme. Cinq thèmes principaux ont été dégagés, mettant en évidence l'affect et l'expérience du leader de groupe: Les émotions pendant l'intervention, la flexibilité, l'engagement et les liens avec les étudiantes, le soutien du personnel du programme et la culture de l'école. Les résultats encouragent les professionnels à rester flexibles lors de la mise en œuvre des programmes, à envisager des évaluations régulières de l'affect tout au long des programmes de choix de carrière et à reconnaître la réciprocité de l'engagement, de l'affect et de l'adhésion au programme entre les intervenantes et les participantes.

El propósito de este estudio fue explorar cómo el afecto del líder grupal impactó en la impartición de un programa de educación vocacional. A través de un diseño de estudio de caso, se recopilaron datos a través de grupos focales y publicaciones en blog procedentes de 16 miembros del personal del programa. Se obtuvieron cinco temas principales, destacando el afecto y la experiencia del líder del grupo: emociones durante la intervención, flexibilidad, participación y relaciones de los estudiantes, apoyo del personal del programa y cultura escolar. Los hallazgos alentaron a los educadores vocacionales a permanecer flexibles al entregar la programación, a incluir evaluaciones periódicas del afecto a lo largo de la programación de la carrera y a reconocer la reciprocidad del compromiso, el afecto y la aceptación mutua del programa entre los facilitadores y los participantes.

Comparing Quality of Surgical Care Between the US Department of Veterans Affairs and Non-Veterans Affairs Settings: A Systematic Review.

In response to concerns about healthcare access and long wait times within the Veterans Health Administration (VA), Congress passed the Choice Act of 2014 and the Maintaining Internal Systems and Strengthening Integrated Outside Networks (MISSION) Act of 2018 to create a program for patients to receive care in non-VA sites of care, paid by VA. Questions remain about the quality of surgical care between these sites in specific and between VA and non-VA care in general. This review synthesizes recent evidence comparing surgical care between VA and non-VA delivered care across the domains of quality and safety, access, patient experience, and comparative cost/efficiency (2015 to 2021). Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria. Of 13 studies reporting quality and safety outcomes, 11 reported that quality and safety of VA surgical care were as good as or better than non-VA sites of care. Six studies of access did not have a preponderance of evidence favoring care in either setting. One study of patient experience reported VA care as about equal to non-VA care. All 4 studies of cost/efficiency outcomes favored non-VA care. Based on limited data, these findings suggest that expanding eligibility for veterans to get care in the community may not provide benefits in terms of increasing access to surgical procedures, will not result in better quality, and may result in worse quality of care, but may reduce inpatient length of stay and perhaps cost less.

Experiences of Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP)-prepared nurses choosing to pursue a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly, nurses with a Doctor of Nursing Practice (DNP) degree are seeking a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree. This subset of students may provide valuable insight for bolstering the PhD-prepared workforce, which is in decline. PURPOSE: The purpose of this research was to understand the essence of the lived experience of DNP-prepared nurses choosing to pursue a PhD degree. METHOD: An existential phenomenological study was undertaken, with 10 DNP-to-PhD students interviewed. RESULTS: The DNP-to-PhD experience is about being On a Mission. The Nursing Hierarchy was an implicit force influencing students' missions, and their experiences were characterized by five themes: (a) Having Needs the DNP Can't Meet: "I had to go back and do more," (b) Considering Dreams and Circumstances: "Now's the time," (c) Developing Confidence: "You can do this!" (d) "I've been very supported"/"I had no support," and (e) "It had to be an internal drive for me." CONCLUSIONS: Study findings demonstrate profound effects of the nursing hierarchy on students' decisions as well as misperceptions that still surround DNP and PhD education and careers. Nursing academicians, organizational leaders, and researchers must address PhD program disinterest, intimidation, and imposter syndrome and improve messaging about both degrees.

Inequities in surgical outcomes by race and sex in the United States: retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess inequities in mortality by race and sex for eight common surgical procedures (elective and non-elective) across specialties in the United States. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: US, 2016-18. PARTICIPANTS: 1 868 036 Black and White Medicare beneficiaries aged 65-99 years undergoing one of eight common surgeries: repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm, appendectomy, cholecystectomy, colectomy, coronary artery bypass surgery, hip replacement, knee replacement, and lung resection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome measure was 30 day mortality, defined as death during hospital admission or within 30 days of the surgical procedure. RESULTS: Postoperative mortality overall was higher in Black men (1698 deaths, adjusted mortality rate 3.05%, 95% confidence interval 2.85% to 3.24%) compared with White men (21 833 deaths, 2.69%, 2.65% to 2.73%), White women (21 847 deaths, 2.38%, 2.35% to 2.41%), and Black women (1631 deaths, 2.18%, 2.04% to 2.31%), after adjusting for potential confounders. A similar pattern was found for elective surgeries, with Black men showing a higher adjusted mortality (393 deaths, 1.30%, 1.14% to 1.46%) compared with White men (5650 deaths, 0.85%, 0.83% to 0.88%), White women (4615 deaths, 0.82%, 0.80% to 0.84%), and Black women (359 deaths, 0.79%, 0.70% to 0.88%). This 0.45 percentage point difference implies that mortality after elective procedures was 50% higher in Black men compared with White men. For non-elective surgeries, however, mortality did not differ between Black men and White men (1305 deaths, 6.69%, 6.26% to 7.11%; and 16 183 deaths, 7.03%, 6.92% to 7.14%, respectively), although mortality was lower for White women and Black women (17 232 deaths, 6.12%, 6.02% to 6.21%; and 1272 deaths, 5.29%, 4.93% to 5.64%, respectively). These differences in mortality appeared within seven days after surgery and persisted for up to 60 days after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative mortality overall was higher among Black men compared with White men, White women, and Black women. These findings highlight the need to understand better the unique challenges Black men who require surgery face.

Disparity-Sensitive Measures in Surgical Care: A Delphi Panel Consensus.

BACKGROUND: In the US, disparities in surgical care impede the delivery of uniformly high-quality care to all patients. There is a lack of disparity-sensitive measures related to surgical care. The American College of Surgeons Metrics for Equitable Access and Care in Surgery group, through research and expert consensus, aimed to identify disparity-sensitive measures in surgical care. STUDY DESIGN: An environmental scan, systematic literature review, and subspecialty society surveys were conducted to identify potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures. A modified Delphi process was conducted where panelists rated measures on both importance and validity. In addition, a novel literature-based disparity-sensitive scoring process was used. RESULTS: We identified 841 potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures. From these, our Delphi and literature-based approaches yielded a consensus list of 125 candidate disparity-sensitive measures. These measures were rated as both valid and important and were supported by the existing literature. CONCLUSION: There are profound disparities in surgical care within the US healthcare system. A multidisciplinary Delphi panel identified 125 potential disparity-sensitive surgical measures that could be used to track health disparities, evaluate the impact of focused interventions, and reduce healthcare inequity.

Conceptualizing college-going volition in rural Appalachian high school students.

Understanding the gap between students' aspirations for postsecondary education and their actual postsecondary attainment is key to understanding and reducing educational and vocational inequities. Just as work volition has emerged as a key factor in understanding access to decent work, students' sense of control over or volition in the college-going process may be a key factor in understanding their access to postsecondary education. In the current study, we adapted a common measure of work volition to create a measure of college-going volition (CGV). In a large sample of rural Appalachian high school students, the measure showed good psychometric properties and strong measurement invariance across gender and prospective college-generation groups. There were no gender differences in CGV, but prospective first-generation college students demonstrated significantly lower CGV than their continuing-generation peers. CGV also accounted for significant unique variance in college-going self-efficacy beyond educational barriers.

Management of symptomatic cholelithiasis: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic cholelithiasis is a common surgical disease and accounts for half of the over one million cholecystectomies performed in the USA annually. Despite its prevalence, only one prior systematic review has examined the evidence around treatment strategies and it contained a narrow scope. The goal of this systematic review was to analyze the clinical effectiveness of treatment options for symptomatic cholelithiasis, including surgery, non-surgical therapies, and ED pain management strategies. METHODS: Literature search was performed from January 2000 through June 2020, and a narrative analysis was performed as studies were heterogeneous. RESULTS: We identified 12 publications reporting on 10 trials (9 randomized controlled trials and 1 observational study) comparing treatment methods. The studies assessed surgery, observation, lithotripsy, ursodeoxycholic acid, electro-acupuncture, and pain-management strategies in the emergency department. Only one compared surgery to observation. CONCLUSION: This work presents the existing data and underscores the current gap in knowledge regarding treatment for patients with symptomatic cholelithiasis. We use these results to suggest how future trials may guide comparisons between the timing of surgery and watchful waiting to create a set of standardized guidelines. Providing appropriate and timely treatment for symptomatic cholelithiasis is important to streamline care for a costly and prevalent disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO Protocol Number: CRD42020153153.

Delay to Surgery for Patients with Symptomatic Cholelithiasis: Retrospective Analysis of an Administrative California Database after Discharge from the Emergency Department.

BACKGROUND: Timely receipt of surgery should be available for all patients. Few studies have examined differences in the treatment of symptomatic cholelithiasis (SC), a common surgical problem, based on race/ethnicity or insurance status. This study aimed to identify differences in repeat emergency department (ED) use and wait time to cholecystectomy for SC. STUDY DESIGN: Patients discharged from the ED with SC between July 1, 2016, and December 31, 2017, were identified from California administrative databases and followed for 1 year. Repeat ED use and wait time to elective and nonelective cholecystectomy after ED discharge were examined using logistic and negative binomial regression models. RESULTS: The final cohort analyzed 13,596 patients who underwent cholecystectomy within 1 year from index ED visit for SC. In adjusted analysis, non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds for repeat ED use for biliary-related conditions before elective surgery and experienced longer waits for cholecystectomy (across several measures of wait times) compared with non-Hispanic White patients. Similar findings were seen for Medicaid and self-pay compared with privately insured patients. For example, self-pay patients had more than double the odds of experiencing repeat ED use while waiting for elective cholecystectomy compared with privately insured patients (adjusted odds ratio 2.49, 95% CI 1.88-3.31). CONCLUSION: Patients with SC receiving cholecystectomy within 1 year from index ED visit were more likely to have repeat ED use and longer waits to surgery based on their race/ethnicity and insurance status, even after adjusting for other measures of access. We identify a vulnerable population at risk for differences in treatment for a common surgical pathology.

Identifying vulnerable populations with symptomatic cholelithiasis at risk for increased health care utilization.

BACKGROUND: Gallstones are a common problem in the United States with many patients suffering from symptomatic cholelithiasis (SC). Patients with SC may first present to the emergency department ED) and are often discharged for elective follow-up; however, it is unknown what system and patient factors are associated with increased risk for ED revisits. This study aimed to assess longitudinal ED utilization and cholecystectomy for patients with SC and identify patient, geographic, and hospital characteristics associated with ED revisits, specifically race/ethnicity and insurance status. METHODS: Patients discharged from the ED with SC between July 1, 2016, and December 31, 2017, were identified from California administrative databases and followed for 1 year. Emergency department revisits and cholecystectomy after discharge were examined using logistic regression, clustering standard errors by hospital. Models adjusted for patient, geographic, and hospital variables using census and hospital administrative data. RESULTS: Cohort included 34,427 patients who presented to the ED with SC and were discharged. There were 18.8% of the patients that had one or more biliary-related ED revisits within 1 year. In fully adjusted models, non-Hispanic Black patients had higher odds for any ED revisit (adjusted odds ratio 1.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.09-1.39) and for two more ED revisits (adjusted odds ratio 1.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.82). Insurance type was also associated with ED revisits. CONCLUSION: Non-Hispanic Black patients experienced higher utilization of health care resources for SC after adjusting for other patient, geographic and hospital variables. Strategies to mitigate these disparities may include the development of standardized protocols regarding the follow-up and education for SC. Implementation of such strategies can ensure equitable treatment for all patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic and Epidemiological; Level III.

Trends in Robot-Assisted Procedures for General Surgery in the Veterans Health Administration.

INTRODUCTION: Implementation of robot-assisted procedures is growing. Utilization within the country's largest healthcare network, the Veterans Health Administration, is unclear. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using data from the Department of Veterans Affairs Corporate Data Warehouse from January 2015 through December 2019. Trends in robot utilization for cholecystectomy, ventral hernia repair, and inguinal hernia repair were characterized nationally and regionally by Veterans Integrated Services Network. Patients, who underwent laparoscopic repairs for these procedures and open hernia repairs, were included to determine proportion performed robotically. RESULTS: We identified 119,191 patients, of which 5689 (4.77%) received a robotic operation. The proportion of operations performed robotically increased from 1.49% to 10.55% (7.08-fold change; slope, 2.14% per year; 95% confidence interval [0.79%, 3.49%]). Ventral hernia repair had the largest growth in robotic procedures (1.51% to 13.94%; 9.23-fold change; slope, 2.86% per year; 95% confidence interval [1.04%, 4.68%]). Regions with the largest increase in robotic utilization were primarily along the Northeast, Midwest, and West Coast. CONCLUSIONS: Robot utilization in general surgery is increasing at different rates across the United States in the Veterans Health Administration. Future studies should investigate the regional disparities and drivers of this approach.

Robot-Assisted General Surgery Procedures at the Veterans Health Administration: A Comparison of Surgical Techniques.

INTRODUCTION: The use of the robot in general surgery has exploded in the last decade. The Veterans Health Administration presents a unique opportunity to study differences between surgical approaches due to the ability to control for health system and insurance variability. This study compares clinical outcomes between robot-assisted and laparoscopic or open techniques for three general surgery procedures. METHODS: A retrospective observational study using the Veterans Affair Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Operative time, length of stay, and complications were compared for cholecystectomy (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic), ventral, and inguinal hernia repair (robot-assisted versus laparoscopic or open) from 2015 to 2019. RESULTS: More than 80,000 cases were analyzed (21,652 cholecystectomy, 9214 ventral hernia repairs, and 51,324 inguinal hernia repairs). Median operative time was longer for all robot-assisted approaches as compared to laparoscopic or open techniques with the largest difference seen between open and robot-assisted primary ventral hernia repair (unadjusted difference of 93 min, P < 0.001). Median length of stay was between 1 and 4 d and significantly for robot-assisted ventral hernia repairs (versus open, P < 0.01; versus lap for recurrent hernia, P < 0.05). Specific postoperative outcomes of interest were overall low with few differences between techniques. CONCLUSIONS: While the robotic platform was associated with longer operative time, these findings must be interpreted in the context of a learning curve and indications for use (i.e., use of the robot for technically challenging cases). Our findings suggest that at the Veterans Health Administration, the robot is as safe a platform for common general surgery procedures as traditional approaches. Future studies should focus on patient-centered outcomes including pain and cosmesis.

Self-selection vs Randomized Assignment of Treatment for Appendicitis.

Importance: For adults with appendicitis, several randomized clinical trials have demonstrated that antibiotics are an effective alternative to appendectomy. However, it remains unknown how the characteristics of patients in such trials compare with those of patients who select their treatment and whether outcomes differ. Objective: To compare participants in the Comparison of Outcomes of Antibiotic Drugs and Appendectomy (CODA) randomized clinical trial (RCT) with a parallel cohort study of participants who declined randomization and self-selected treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: The CODA trial was conducted in 25 US medical centers. Participants were enrolled between May 3, 2016, and February 5, 2020; all participants were eligible for at least 1 year of follow-up, with all follow-up ending in 2021. The randomized cohort included 1094 adults with appendicitis; the self-selection cohort included patients who declined participation in the randomized group, of whom 253 selected appendectomy and 257 selected antibiotics. In this secondary analysis, characteristics and outcomes in both self-selection and randomized cohorts are described with an exploratory analysis of cohort status and receipt of appendectomy. Interventions: Appendectomy vs antibiotics. Main Outcomes and Measures: Characteristics among participants randomized to either appendectomy or antibiotics were compared with those of participants who selected their own treatment. Results: Clinical characteristics were similar across the self-selection cohort (510 patients; mean age, 35.8 years [95% CI, 34.5-37.1]; 218 female [43%; 95% CI, 39%-47%]) and the randomized group (1094 patients; mean age, 38.2 years [95% CI, 37.4-39.0]; 386 female [35%; 95% CI, 33%-38%]). Compared with the randomized group, those in the self-selection cohort were less often Spanish speaking (n = 99 [19%; 95% CI, 16%-23%] vs n = 336 [31%; 95% CI, 28%-34%]), reported more formal education (some college or more, n = 355 [72%; 95% CI, 68%-76%] vs n = 674 [63%; 95% CI, 60%-65%]), and more often had commercial insurance (n = 259 [53%; 95% CI, 48%-57%] vs n = 486 [45%; 95% CI, 42%-48%]). Most outcomes were similar between the self-selection and randomized cohorts. The number of patients undergoing appendectomy by 30 days was 38 (15.3%; 95% CI, 10.7%-19.7%) among those selecting antibiotics and 155 (19.2%; 95% CI, 15.9%-22.5%) in those who were randomized to antibiotics (difference, 3.9%; 95% CI, -1.7% to 9.5%). Differences in the rate of appendectomy were primarily observed in the non-appendicolith subgroup. Conclusions and Relevance: This secondary analysis of the CODA RCT found substantially similar outcomes across the randomized and self-selection cohorts, suggesting that the randomized trial results are generalizable to the community at large. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02800785.