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.

Black patients are more likely to undergo parathyroidectomy for secondary hyperparathyroidism.

BACKGROUND: Prior studies have demonstrated racial disparities in the severity of secondary hyperparathyroidism among dialysis patients. Our primary objective was to study the racial and socioeconomic differences in the timing and likelihood of parathyroidectomy in patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism. METHODS: We used the United States Renal Data System to identify 634,428 adult (age ≥18) patients who were on maintenance dialysis between 2006 and 2016 with Medicare as their primary payor. Adjusted multivariable Cox regression was performed to quantify the differences in parathyroidectomy by race. RESULTS: Of this cohort, 27.3% (173,267) were of Black race. Compared to 15.4% of White patients, 23.1% of Black patients lived in a neighborhood that was below a predefined poverty level (P < .001). The cumulative incidence of parathyroidectomy at 10 years after dialysis initiation was 8.8% among Black patients compared to 4.3% among White patients (P < .001). On univariable analysis, Black patients were more likely to undergo parathyroidectomy (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.83; 95% confidence interval, 1.74-1.93). This association persisted after adjusting for age, sex, cause of end-stage renal disease, body mass index, comorbidities, dialysis modality, and poverty level (adjusted hazard ratio = 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-1.43). Therefore, patient characteristics and socioeconomic status explained 26% of the association between race and likelihood of parathyroidectomy. CONCLUSION: Black patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism due to end-stage renal disease are more likely to undergo parathyroidectomy with shorter intervals between dialysis initiation and parathyroidectomy. This association is only partially explained by patient characteristics and socioeconomic factors.

A Qualitative Analysis of Surgical Faculty and Surgical Resident Perceptions of Potential Barriers to Implementing a Novel Surgical Education Curriculum.

OBJECTIVE: Sociocultural differences between patients and physicians affect communication, and suboptimal communication can lead to patient dissatisfaction and poor health outcomes. To mitigate disparities in surgical outcomes, the Provider Awareness and Cultural dexterity Toolkit for Surgeons was developed as a novel curriculum for surgical residents focusing on patient-centeredness and enhanced patient-clinician communication through a cultural dexterity framework. This study's objective was to examine surgical faculty and surgical resident perspectives on potential facilitators and barriers to implementing the cultural dexterity curriculum. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Focus groups were conducted at 2 separate academic conferences, with the curriculum provided to participants for advanced review. The first 4 focus groups consisted entirely of surgical faculty (n = 37), each with 9 to 10 participants. The next 4 focus groups consisted of surgical residents (n = 31), each with 6 to 11 participants. Focus groups were recorded and transcribed, and the data were thematically analyzed using a constant, comparative method. RESULTS: Three major themes emerged: (1) Departmental and hospital endorsement of the curriculum are necessary to ensure successful rollout. (2) Residents must be engaged in the curriculum in order to obtain full participation and "buy-in." (3) The application of cultural dexterity concepts in practice are influenced by systemic and institutional factors. CONCLUSIONS: Institutional support, resident engagement, and applicability to practice are crucial considerations for the implementation of a cultural dexterity curriculum for surgical residents. These 3 tenets, as identified by surgical faculty and residents, are critical for ensuring an impactful and clinically relevant education program.

Do outcomes in emergency general surgery vary for minority patients based on surgeons' racial/ethnic case mix?

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that Black and Hispanic patients undergoing Emergency General Surgery (EGS) with surgeons who treat higher proportions of minority patients will experience better outcomes. METHODS: Using the Florida State Inpatient Database (2010-2014), we performed multivariable regression to assess complications in patients undergoing EGS as a function of patient race and the proportion of Black, Hispanic, or White patients treated by the surgeon during the study period. Analyses were clustered by hospital and adjusted for patient age, comorbidities, sex, insurance, and hospital-level variables. RESULTS: 5471 surgeons were distributed across 204 hospitals. Of the 520,024 patients included, 67% were White, 16.5% were Black, and 14.2% were Hispanic. For non-White patients undergoing EGS, the increased likelihood of sustaining a complication relative to White patients (OR 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-1.11) decreased when treated by surgeons whose caseload consisted of higher proportions of Black/Hispanic patients (aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78-0.99). CONCLUSION: Black patients undergoing EGS are at higher risk for experiencing complications when treated by surgeons whose caseload consists of higher proportions of White patients.

The impact of individual physicians on outcomes after trauma: is it the system or the surgeon?

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking of mortality outcomes across the country has revealed major differences in survival based on the trauma center at which a patient receives care. The role of the individual surgeon in determining trauma outcomes is unknown. Most believe that differences in outcomes are primarily driven by system- and process-based variations. Our objective was to determine if variation in individual surgeon outcomes could help explain difference in survival after trauma. METHODS: Analysis of trauma patients in the Florida State Inpatient Database from 2010 to 2014. The presence of unique physician identifiers, in addition to hospital identifiers, rendered this data set ideal for performance of multilevel analysis. The amount of the variation attributable to surgeon-level variation was calculated using multilevel random-effects models controlling for patient clinical factors (such as injury severity and comorbidities/age) and hospital-level factors, such as case mix and bed size. RESULTS: There were 31 hospitals, 175 surgeons, and 65,706 admissions. The overall mortality rate was 5.6%. The average mortality rate across surgeons ranged from 0% to 17.4% (mean 0.4%, standard deviation 1.85). At the individual surgeon level, when controlling for clinical and hospital-level factors, 9% of this variation was attributable solely to the surgeon. CONCLUSIONS: At the state level, we found that differences in outcomes among trauma centers are impacted by individual surgeon-level variation. Implementation of protocolized, system-based trauma care is useful for improving the overall quality of care for injured patients but does not entirely negate surgeon-specific variations in management.