Registry-Based Trainee Assessments: Leveraging a Quality Collaborative for Surgical Education.

INTRODUCTION: We present our experience developing and embedding a registry-based module for resident feedback. METHODS: At our institution, entering operative data into the institutional quality collaborative registry is standard practice. In February 2019, a surgical education module was embedded into the registry to capture procedure-specific resident operative assessments. Faculty engagement with the sugical education module was assessed during its first year in existence (February 2019-February 2020). RESULTS: In total, 1074 of 1269 (85%) operative assessments were completed by 27 faculty via the surgical education registry module. Median faculty engagement rate with the module following resident-assisted procedures was 91% [IQR 76%-100%]. Residents received a median of 7 operative assessments [IQR 2-19] over the study period. CONCLUSION: By embedding a surgical education module into an existing surgical quality collaborative registry, procedure-specific operative assessments can be routinely captured.

Utilization of a quality reporting system to increase faculty participation in resident operative assessment.

BACKGROUND: A quality collaborative across our hospital system was initiated to track surgical outcomes. We sought to determine whether incorporating a resident operative performance assessment into this quality collaborative would increase the quantity and quality of these assessments and impact relevant milestones. METHODS: A resident operative assessment was added to a quality reporting system required to be completed by faculty at the completion of 2 operations. Three milestones directly related to operative performance were analyzed-Patient Care 3, Medical Knowledge 2, and Interpersonal and Communication Skills 3. Residents were divided in 2 groups: quality collaborative (≥10 operative assessments) and no quality collaborative (<10 operative assessments). Milestones from Spring 2019 and Fall 2019 were analyzed. RESULTS: Faculty participation was 86% with 407 assessments completed from February to October 2019. A difference in the rate of change in resident performance for Patient Care 3 (+0.95 vs +0.55; P = .04) and Interpersonal and Communication Skills 3 (+1.05 vs +0.52; P = .02) was observed for those residents in the quality collaborative group (n = 20) compared with baseline data. CONCLUSION: Addition of an operative assessment to a mandatory quality collaborative increases faculty participation and impacts resident milestone determination. These findings highlight opportunities to find innovative and efficient methods to improve faculty engagement.

Effect modification of resident autonomy and seniority on perioperative outcomes in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

BACKGROUND: Resident operative involvement is an integral aspect of general surgery residency training. However, current data examining the effect of resident autonomy on perioperative outcomes remain limited. METHODS: Patient and operator-specific data were collected from 344 adult laparoscopic cholecystectomies at a tertiary academic institution and its regional affiliates between 2018 and 2019. Multivariate modeling compared postoperative outcomes between cases completed with or without resident involvement and its effect modification by resident seniority and autonomy per Zwisch scale. Outcomes include 30-day postoperative complications, hospital readmission rate, and operative time. RESULTS: Multivariate analysis revealed resident involvement in laparoscopic cholecystectomy did not significantly change odds of 30-day postoperative complications (OR 2.52, p = 0.185, 95% CI 0.64-9.92) or hospital readmission (OR 1.61, p = 0.538, 95% CI 0.36-7.23). Operative time is significantly increased compared to faculty-only cases (IRR 1.37, p < 0.001, 95% CI 1.26-1.48). While accounting for case difficulty and resident performance evaluated by SIMPL criteria, stratification by resident autonomy measured by Zwisch scale or seniority reveal no effect modification on 30-day postoperative complications, readmissions, or operative time. The effect of resident involvement on longer relative rates of operative time loses its significance in supervision-only cases (IRR 1.18, p = 0.069, 95% CI 0.99-1.41). CONCLUSION: While resident involvement and autonomy are associated with significantly longer operative times in laparoscopic cholecystectomy, their lack of significant effect on postoperative outcomes argues strongly for continued resident involvement and supervised operative independence.

Equity on the frontlines of trauma surgery: An #EAST4ALL roundtable.

BACKGROUND: Inequity exists in surgical training and the workplace. The Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma (EAST) Equity, Quality, and Inclusion in Trauma Surgery Ad Hoc Task Force (EAST4ALL) sought to raise awareness and provide resources to combat these inequities. METHODS: A study was conducted of EAST members to ascertain areas of inequity and lack of inclusion. Specific problems and barriers were identified that hindered inclusion. Toolkits were developed as resources for individuals and institutions to address and overcome these barriers. RESULTS: Four key areas were identified: (1) harassment and discrimination, (2) gender pay gap or parity, (3) implicit bias and microaggressions, and (4) call-out culture. A diverse panel of seven surgeons with experience in overcoming these barriers either on a personal level or as a chief or chair of surgery was formed. Four scenarios based on these key areas were proposed to the panelists, who then modeled responses as allies. CONCLUSION: Despite perceived progress in addressing discrimination and inequity, residents and faculty continue to encounter barriers at the workplace at levels today similar to those decades ago. Action is needed to address inequities and lack of inclusion in acute care surgery. The EAST is working on fostering a culture that minimizes bias and recognizes and addresses systemic inequities, and has provided toolkits to support these goals. Together, we can create a better future for all of us.

Standardizing the culture of trauma rotation handoffs.

OBJECTIVE: One of the General Surgery milestones focuses on effective handoffs between residents as they change shifts. Although the content of handoffs is crucial, we recognized that the culture of handoffs was equally important. After the reorganization of the trauma service at our institution, there were difficulties in maintaining the standardized handoff culture. We analyzed the culture of handoffs on the trauma service to create an environment more conducive to effective handoffs. DESIGN: All trauma activations from 2012 to 2013 were evaluated from our institution's trauma data registry. Data on timing of activations and disposition of the patient were analyzed to understand service work flow. A survey was developed and administered to the residents to assess the culture of trauma handoffs. SETTING: This work occurred at an academic, state-designated level 1 trauma center. PARTICIPANTS: All current residents in the general surgery residency who rotated on the trauma service in the last 5 years. RESULTS: There were 1654 admissions to the trauma service from June 2012 to July 2013. The single busiest hour for trauma admissions (7% of admissions) was the same time the residents were designated to handoff. Interruptions occurred often; 83% of residents indicated that a handoff interruption occurred daily, and 73% indicated a new activation interrupted handoffs weekly. A large majority, 61%, felt patient care was frequently compromised by an ineffective handoff. Similarly, as a direct result of inadequate handoffs, 50% felt uncomfortable answering nurses' pages at night. CONCLUSIONS: The unique situation of the trauma service impaired the handoff culture for residents. Assessment of our trauma activation flow indicates the timing of handoffs was adversely affecting our resident's ability to handoff effectively, requiring interventions to improve the efficacy and safety of handoffs.

Relative value unit impact of complex skin closures to academic surgical melanoma practices.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma excisions frequently are associated with significant soft-tissue defects, creating the need for complex closures. These closures could be performed by either surgical oncologists or plastic surgeons. We sought to quantify the relative value units (RVUs) and describe the practice patterns of 2 academic surgical subspecialties after a melanoma excision. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, a retrospective data analysis of a billing database was conducted on all melanoma patients undergoing an excision and closure by surgical oncology and plastic surgery departments in 2007. Data were obtained using billing records for Current Procedural Terminology diagnosis codes. RVUs were used to quantify the value added to each practice from these closures. The surgical oncologist and patient decided if a plastic surgeon was needed. RESULTS: A total of 270 closures were performed, 53 (19.9%) primary and 217 (80.1%) complex. The surgical oncologists performed most complex closures (188; 86.6%), and the plastic surgeons performed the remainder (29; 13.4%), generating a total of 1,921 RVUs (1,630 by the surgical oncologists and 291 by the plastic surgeons). For analysis, complex closures were divided among 4 anatomic sites: trunk, upper extremity, lower extremity, and head and neck. Most closures by the surgical oncologists were adjacent tissue rearrangements (155; 82%) and the remainder were skin grafts (33; 18%). Closures by the plastic surgeons were more likely to be a full-thickness skin graft (P < .0027) in the head and neck region (P < .0001), with a higher associated median RVU/case (10.15 compared with 8.44 for the surgical oncologists; P < .0002). CONCLUSIONS: At our institution, the majority of melanoma closures were performed by surgical oncologists. However, plastic surgery often was involved in more complex closures in the head and neck. This data set quantifies the RVUs added and describes the types of closures performed in an academic melanoma practice.