Temporal attention selectively enhances target features.

Temporal attention, the allocation of attention to a moment in time, improves perception. Here, we examined the computational mechanism by which temporal attention improves perception, under a divisive normalization framework. Under this framework, attention can improve perception of a target signal in three ways: stimulus enhancement (increasing gain across all sensory channels), signal enhancement (selectively increasing gain in channels that encode the target stimulus), or external noise exclusion (reducing the gain in channels that encode irrelevant features). These mechanisms make diverging predictions when a target is embedded in varying levels of noise: stimulus enhancement improves performance only when noise is low, signal enhancement improves performance at all noise intensities, and external noise exclusion improves performance only when noise is high. To date, temporal attention studies have used noise-free displays. Therefore, it is unclear whether temporal attention acts via stimulus enhancement (amplifying both target features and noise) or signal enhancement (selectively amplifying target features) because both mechanisms predict improved performance in the absence of noise. To tease these mechanisms apart, we manipulated temporal attention using an auditory cue while parametrically varying external noise in a fine-orientation discrimination task. Temporal attention improved perceptual thresholds across all noise levels. Formal model comparisons revealed that this cuing effect was best accounted for by a combination of signal enhancement and stimulus enhancement, suggesting that temporal attention improves perceptual performance, in part, by selectively increasing gain for target features.

First-Pass Success Intubations Using Video Laryngoscopy Versus Direct Laryngoscopy: A Retrospective Prehospital Ambulance Service Study.

OBJECTIVE: In emergency medicine, endotracheal intubation is the gold standard for airway management. First-pass intubation success is beneficial because it secures the patient airway more quickly and avoids complications associated with repeated attempts, such as bleeding and swelling of soft tissue. The key to first-pass success is the ability to visualize the laryngeal inlet. Visualization can be accomplished using traditional direct laryngoscopy or video laryngoscopy. The purpose of our study was to compare the rate of successful first-pass endotracheal intubations using a video laryngoscope with that using a direct visualization laryngoscope in a prehospital emergency setting. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed data that had been prospectively collected in our emergency department regarding patients who underwent endotracheal intubation performed by personnel from a single local ambulance service from January 1, 2014, through December 31, 2015. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-one patients were intubated using video laryngoscopy and 115 using direct visualization laryngoscopy. The first-pass endotracheal intubation success rate using video laryngoscopy was 12.6% higher than with direct laryngoscopy. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study shows that video laryngoscopy had a higher first-pass success rate than direct laryngoscopy. This is promising because decreasing failure rates provide better patient outcomes.

Underrepresented Minorities are Underrepresented Among General Surgery Applicants Selected to Interview.

OBJECTIVE: Diversity is an ill-defined entity in general surgery training. The Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education recently proposed new common program requirements including verbiage requiring diversity in residency. "Recruiting" for diversity can be challenging within the constraints of geographic preference, type of program, and applicant qualifications. In addition, the Match process adds further uncertainty. We sought to study the self-identified racial/ethnic distribution of general surgery applicants to better ascertain the characteristics of underrepresented minorities (URM) within the general surgery applicant pool. DESIGN: Program-specific data from the Electronic Residency Application Service was collated for the 2018 medical student application cycle. Data were abstracted for all participating programs' applicants and those selected to interview. Applicants who did not enter a self-identified race/ethnicity were excluded from analysis. URM were defined as those identifying as Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino/of Spanish origin, American Indian/Alaskan Native, or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander-Samoan. Appropriate statistical analyses were accomplished. SETTING: Ten general surgery residency programs-5 independent programs and 5 university programs. PARTICIPANTS: Residency applicants to the participating general surgery residency programs. RESULTS: Ten surgery residency programs received 10,312 applications from 3192 unique applicants. Seven hundred and seventy-eight applications did not include a self-identified race/ethnicity and were excluded from analysis. The racial/ethnic makeup of applicants in this study cohort was similar to that from 2017 to 2018 Electronic Residency Application Service data of 4262 total applicants to categorical general surgery. Programs received a median of 1085 (range: 485-1264) applications each and altogether selected 617 unique applicants for interviews. Overall, 2148 applicants graduated from US medical schools, and of those, 595 (28%) were offered interviews. The mean age of applicants was 28.8 ± 3.8 years and 1316 (41%) were female. Hispanic/Latino/of Spanish origin, Black, and American Indian/Alaskan Native/Hawaiian/Pacific Islander-Samoan applicants constituted 12%, 8%, and 1% of total applicants, but only 8%, 6%, and 1% of those selected for interview. Overall, 29% of applicants had United States Medical Licensing Examination (USMLE) Step 1 scores ≤220; 37 (6%) of those selected for interviews had a USMLE Step 1 score of ≤220. A higher proportion of URM applicants had USMLE scores ≤220 compared to White and Asian applicants. Non-white self-identification was a significant independent predictor of a lower likelihood of interview selection. Female gender, USMLE Step 1 score >220, and graduating from a US medical school were associated with an increased likelihood of being selected to interview. CONCLUSIONS: URM applicants represented a disproportionately smaller percentage of applicants selected for interview. USMLE Step 1 scores were lower among the URM applicants. Training programs that use discreet USMLE cutoffs are likely excluding URM at a higher rate than their non-URM applicants. Attempts to recruit racially/ethnically diverse trainees should include program-level analysis to determine disparities and a focused strategy to interview applicants who might be overlooked by conventional screening tools.

A Reappraisal of the Comparative Effectiveness of Lumpectomy Versus Mastectomy on Breast Cancer Survival: A Propensity Score-Matched Update From the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB).

BACKGROUND: Recent observational studies are concerning because they document rising mastectomy rates coinciding with more than a dozen reports that lumpectomy has better overall survival (OS) than mastectomy. Our aim was to determine if there were differences in OS of matched breast cancer patients undergoing lumpectomy versus mastectomy in the National Cancer Database (NCDB). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort of patients with stage I-III breast cancer in the NCDB (2004-2013) was identified. Propensity score matching (PSM), Kaplan-Meier, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine OS by type of surgery. RESULTS: Of 845,136 patients, 464,052 (54.9%) underwent lumpectomy and 381,084 (45.1%) underwent mastectomy. After PSM, the hazard ratio (HR) and confidence interval (CI) for OS in all patients comparing lumpectomy with mastectomy was 1.02 (CI, 1.00-1.04; P = .002). In patients with stage I, II, and III, they were HR 1.27 (CI, 1.23-1.36; P < .001), HR 0.98 (CI, 0.95-1.01; P = .21), and HR 0.83 (CI, 0.80-0.86; P < .001), respectively. In subgroup analyses of all patients by estrogen receptor (ER) status, they were HR 1.05 (CI, 1.03-1.07; P < .001) and HR 1.00 (CI, 0.96-1.03; P = .65) in ER+ and ER- patients. CONCLUSION: In our primary model of all stage I-III matched patients, using the most recent NCDB data and the largest observational sample size to date, the OS after mastectomy was not inferior to lumpectomy. This finding can be reassuring to patients and providers. In subgroup analyses, the association between type of surgery and OS differed by cancer stage and hormone receptor status.

Opioid prescribing trends in postpartum women: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The postpartum period can be a particularly vulnerable time for exposure to opioid medications, and there are currently no consensus guidelines for physicians to follow regarding opioid prescribing during this period. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate inter- and intrahospital variability in opioid prescribing patterns in postpartum women and better understand the role of clinical variables in prescribing. STUDY DESIGN: Data were extracted from electronic medical records on 4248 patients who delivered at 6 hospitals across the United States from January 2016 through March 2016. The primary outcome of the study was postpartum opioid prescription at the time of hospital discharge. Age, parity, route of delivery, and hospital were analyzed individually and with multivariate analyses to minimize confounding factors. Statistical methods included χ2 to analyze frequency of opioid prescription by hospital, parity, tobacco use, delivery method, and laceration type. An analysis of variance was used to analyze morphine equivalent dose by hospital. RESULTS: The percentage of women prescribed postpartum opioids varied significantly by hospital, ranging from 27.6% to 70.9% (P <0.001). Oxycodone-acetaminophen was the most commonly prescribed medication (50.3%) with each hospital having its preferred opioid type. Median number of tablets prescribed ranged from 20 to 40 (P < .0001). Primiparous women were more likely to receive opioids than multiparous women when broken down by a parity of 1, 2, 3, 4, and ≥5 (52.8%, 48.0%, 47.6%, 40.1%, and 45.8%, respectively, P = .0005). Among women who had vaginal deliveries, opioid prescription rates were higher in women who experienced either a second-degree laceration (35.5%, P = .0002) or a third-/fourth-degree laceration (59.3%, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Postpartum opioid prescription rates vary widely among hospitals, but providers within the same hospital tend to follow similar prescribing trends. The variation in prescribing found in our study illustrates the need for clear consensus guidelines for postpartum pain management.

Roux-en-Y gastric bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy: what factors influence patient preference?

BACKGROUND: Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) and sleeve gastrectomy (SG) are the most commonly performed bariatric procedures. RYGB involves altered gastrointestinal anatomy and 2 anastomoses, while SG involves gastric resection. When potential patients view images of the procedures, they may perceive RYGB to involve significant risk compared with SG, in which no significant gastrointestinal alterations are depicted. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate preferences for RYGB versus SG. SETTING: Survey of U.S. adults. METHODS: An electronic survey was distributed to 1000 U.S. adults. Respondents selected either RYGB or SG based on (1) procedural pictures alone, (2) only data on risks and benefits of each procedure, (3) pictures with corresponding risk/benefit profile, and (4) pictures with mismatched information. RESULTS: Overall, 999 individuals met inclusion criteria; 66 (7%) had undergone bariatric surgery and were excluded. Mean age and body mass index of respondents was 44.8 ± 14.6 years (n = 922) and 28.7 ± 8.0 kg/m2 (n = 915). A higher proportion of patients preferred RYGB to SG when images only were provided (54% versus 46%), when information only was provided (63% versus 37%), and when correct information with the procedure image was provided (57% versus 43%). When presented with mismatched information and images, 56% preferred RYGB information + SG image versus SG information + RYGB image (44%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this survey, providing evidence-based risks and benefits of a procedure resulted in the majority of respondents choosing RYGB over SG. When procedure images were provided alone, preference for RYGB and SG were similar. There are likely other factors contributing to increasing SG volume aside from patient preference.

A Strategy for Changing Adherence to National Guidelines for Decreasing Laboratory Testing for Early Breast Cancer Patients.

INTRODUCTION: Past studies indicate delays in adoption of consensus-based guideline updates. In June 2016, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network changed its guidelines from routine testing to omission of ordering complete blood cell count (CBC) and liver function tests (LFT) in patients with early breast cancer. In response, we developed an implementation strategy to discontinue our historical practice of routine ordering of these tests in asymptomatic patients. METHODS: The ordering of CBC and LFT for clinical stage I-IIIA breast cancer patients was audited in 2016. In June 2016, we utilized the levers of the National Quality Strategy implementation methodology to enact a system-wide change to omit routine ordering. To measure the plan's effectiveness, guideline compliance for ordering was tracked continually. RESULTS: Of 92 patients with early stage cancer in 2016, the overall rate of compliance with guidelines for ordering a CBC and LFT was 82% (88/107) and 87% (93/107), respectively. Segregated by the pre- and post-guideline change time period, the compliance rates for ordering a CBC and LFT were 78% and 87% (P = 0.076). CONCLUSION: In contrast to historical reports of delays in adoption of new evidence-based guideline changes, we were able to quickly change provider practice during the transition from routine ordering to omission of ordering screening blood tests in newly diagnosed patients with early breast cancer.

Profiling Surgeon Performance for Breast Cancer Lumpectomy by Composite Measurement of Reoperations, Cosmetic Outcomes, and Patient Preferences.

BACKGROUND: Patients want information to search for destination of care for breast-conserving surgery (BCS). To inform patients wanting a lumpectomy, we aimed to develop a pilot project that communicated composite quality measure (QM) results using a '4-star' rating system. Two patient-centered QMs were included in the model-reoperation rate (ROR) and cosmetic outcome (COSM). METHODS: A prospective database was reviewed for stage 0-3 patients undergoing initial lumpectomy by three surgeons from 2010 to 2015. Self-reported COSM was assessed by survey. Multivariate analyses were used to test for interactions between surgeon and other variables known to influence RORs and COSMs. Models of surgeon profiling were developed that summed the ROR and COSM performance scores, then reported results using a Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) star-type system. Functionality for a patient to 'weight' the importance of the ratio of ROR:COSM before profiling was introduced. RESULTS: The unadjusted ROR for stage 1-3 patients for three surgeons was 9.5, 13.0, and 16.3%, respectively (p = 0.179) [overall rate 10.4% (38/366)]. After risk adjustment, differences between surgeons were observed for RORs, but not COSMs. Overall, patients reported excellent, good, fair, and poor COSMs of 55, 30, 11 and 4%, respectively. Composite star scores reflected differences in performance by surgeon, which could increase, or even disappear, dependent on the patient's weighting of the ROR:COSM ratio. CONCLUSION: Composite measures of performance can be developed that allow patients to input their weighted preferences and values into surgeon profiling before they consider a destination of care for BCS.

Benchmarking the American Society of Breast Surgeon Member Performance for More Than a Million Quality Measure-Patient Encounters.

BACKGROUND: Nine breast cancer quality measures (QM) were selected by the American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) for the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Quality Payment Programs (QPP) and other performance improvement programs. We report member performance. STUDY DESIGN: Surgeons entered QM data into an electronic registry. For each QM, aggregate "performance met" (PM) was reported (median, range and percentiles) and benchmarks (target goals) were calculated by CMS methodology, specifically, the Achievable Benchmark of Care™ (ABC) method. RESULTS: A total of 1,286,011 QM encounters were captured from 2011-2015. For 7 QM, first and last PM rates were as follows: (1) needle biopsy (95.8, 98.5%), (2) specimen imaging (97.9, 98.8%), (3) specimen orientation (98.5, 98.3%), (4) sentinel node use (95.1, 93.4%), (5) antibiotic selection (98.0, 99.4%), (6) antibiotic duration (99.0, 99.8%), and (7) no surgical site infection (98.8, 98.9%); all p values < 0.001 for trends. Variability and reasons for noncompliance by surgeon for each QM were identified. The CMS-calculated target goals (ABC™ benchmarks) for PM for 6 QM were 100%, suggesting that not meeting performance is a "never should occur" event. CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons self-reported a large number of specialty-specific patient-measure encounters into a registry for self-assessment and participation in QPP. Despite high levels of performance demonstrated initially in 2011 with minimal subsequent change, the ASBrS concluded "perfect" performance was not a realistic goal for QPP. Thus, after review of our normative performance data, the ASBrS recommended different benchmarks than CMS for each QM.

Contemporary management of subclavian and axillary artery injuries-A Western Trauma Association multicenter review.

BACKGROUND: Subclavian and axillary artery injuries are uncommon. In addition to many open vascular repairs, endovascular techniques are used for definitive repair or vascular control of these anatomically challenging injuries. The aim of this study was to determine the relative roles of endovascular and open techniques in the management of subclavian and axillary artery injuries comparing hospital outcomes, and long-term limb viability. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective review of patients with subclavian or axillary artery injuries from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2014, was completed at 11 participating Western Trauma Association institutions. Statistical analysis included χ, t-tests, and Cochran-Armitage trend tests. A p value less than 0.05 was significant. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-three patients were included; mean age was 36 years, 84% were men. An increase in computed tomography angiography and decrease in conventional angiography was observed over time (p = 0.018). There were 120 subclavian and 119 axillary artery injuries. Procedure type was associated with injury grade (p < 0.001). Open operations were performed in 135 (61%) patients, including 93% of greater than 50% circumference lacerations and 83% of vessel transections. Endovascular repairs were performed in 38 (17%) patients; most frequently for pseudoaneurysms. Fourteen (6%) patients underwent a hybrid procedure. Use of endovascular versus open procedures did not increase over the duration of the study (p = 0.248). In-hospital mortality rate was 10%. Graft or stent thrombosis occurred in 7% and graft or stent infection occurred in 3% of patients. Mean follow-up was 1.6 ± 2.4 years (n = 150). Limb salvage was achieved in 216 (97%) patients. CONCLUSION: The management of subclavian and axillary artery injuries still requires a wide variety of open exposures and procedures, especially for the control of active hemorrhage from more than 50% vessel lacerations and transections. Endovascular repairs were used most often for pseudoaneurysms. Low early complication rates and limb salvage rates of 97% were observed after open and endovascular repairs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic/epidemiologic, level IV.