ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Surgery is essential for gastrointestinal (GI) cancer treatment. Many patients lack access to surgical care that optimizes outcomes. Scarce availability and/or low accessibility of appropriate resources may be the reason for this, especially in economically disadvantaged areas. This study aimed to investigate providers' and survivors' perspectives on barriers and facilitators to the availability and accessibility of surgical care. METHODS: Semistructured interviews informed by surgical disparities and access-to-care conceptual frameworks with purposively selected GI cancer providers and survivors in Alabama and Mississippi were conducted. Survivors were within 3 years of diagnosis of stage I to III esophageal, pancreatic, or colorectal cancer. Transcripts were analyzed using inductive thematic and content analysis techniques. Intercoder agreement was reached at 90 %. RESULTS: The 27 providers included surgeons (n = 11), medical oncologists (n = 2), radiation oncologists (n = 2), a primary care physician (n = 1), nurses (n = 8), and patient navigators (n = 3). This study included 36 survivors with ages ranging from 44 to 87 years. Of the 36 survivors, 21 (58.3 %) were male, and 11 (30.6 %) identified as Black. Responses were grouped into 3 broad categories: (i) transportation/geographic location, (ii) specialized care/testing, and (iii) patient-/provider-related factors. The barriers included lack and cost of transportation, reluctance to travel because of uneasiness with urban centers, low availability of specialized care, overburdened referral centers, provider-related referral biases, and low health literacy. Facilitators included availability of charitable aid, centralizing multidisciplinary care, and efficient appointment scheduling. CONCLUSION: In the Deep South, barriers and facilitators to the availability and accessibility of GI surgical cancer care were identified at the health system, provider, and patient levels, especially for rural residents. Our data suggest targets for improving the use of surgery in GI cancer care.
ABSTRACT
Objective: We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of highly detailed ventral hernia repair (VHR) operative reports and associations between operative report detail and postoperative outcomes in a medico-legal dataset. Background: VHR are one of the most common surgical procedures performed in the United States. Previous work has shown that VHR operative reports are poorly detailed, however, the relationship between operative report detail and patient outcomes is unknown. Methods: This is a retrospective cross-sectional observational study. Operative reports describing VHR were obtained from a medical-legal database. Medical records were screened and data was extracted including clinical outcomes, such as surgical site infection (SSI), hernia recurrence, and reoperation and the presence of key details in each report. Highly detailed operative reports were defined as having 70% of recommended details. The primary outcome was the prevalence of highly detailed VHR operative reports. Results: A total of 1011 VHR operative reports dictated by 693 surgeons across 517 facilities in 50 states were included. Median duration of follow-up was 4.6 years after initial surgery. Only 35.7% of operative reports were highly detailed. More recent operative reports, cases with resident involvement, and contaminated procedures were more likely to be highly detailed (all P < 0.05). Compared to poorly detailed operative reports, cases with highly detailed reports had fewer SSIs (13.2% vs 7.5%, P = 0.006), hernia recurrence (65.8% vs 55.4%, P = 0.002), and reoperation (78.9% vs 62.6%, P = 0.001). Conclusions: In this medico-legal dataset, most VHR operative reports are poorly detailed while highly detailed operative reports were associated with lower rates of complications. Future studies should examine a nationally representative dataset to validate our findings.
