To feel or not to feel: a scoping review and mixed-methods meta-synthesis of moral distress among surgeons.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing concern about the prevalence and impact of moral distress among healthcare workers. While this body of literature is growing, research specifically examining sources of moral distress among surgeons remains sparse. The unique attributes of the surgeon-patient relationship and the context of surgery may expose surgeons to sources of distress that are distinct from other healthcare providers. To date, a summative assessment of moral distress among surgeons does not exist. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of studies focused on moral distress among surgeons. Using guidelines established by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), relevant articles were identified in EBSCOhost PsycINFO, Elsevier EMBASE, Ovid MEDLINE, and Wiley Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials Library from January 1, 2009 to September 29, 2022. Detailed data abstraction was performed on a predetermined instrument and compared across studies. A mixed-methods meta-synthesis was employed for data analysis, and both deductive and inductive methodology was used in our thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1,003 abstracts were screened, and 26 articles (19 quantitative and 7 qualitative) were included for full-text review. Of these, 10 focused only on surgeons. Our analysis revealed numerous definitions of moral distress and 25 instruments used to understand the sources of distress. Moral distress among surgeons is complex and influenced by factors at multiple levels, The most frequent sources originate at the individual and interpersonal levels. However, the environmental, community and policy levels also noted sources of distress. CONCLUSIONS: The reviewed articles identified several common themes and sources of moral distress among surgeons. We also found that research investigating sources of moral distress among surgeons is relatively sparse and confounded by various definitions of moral distress, multiple measurement tools, and frequently conflated terms of moral distress, moral injury, and burnout. This summative assessment presents a model of moral distress delineating these distinct terms, which may be applied to other professions at risk for moral distress.

Delayed urologic cancer care in the COVID-19 pandemic: Patients' experiences.

OBJECTIVE: To understand experiences of patients with genitourinary cancer who experienced delayed cancer care due to the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study with an explanatory sequential design. Qualitative findings are reported here. Patients with muscle invasive bladder, advanced prostate or kidney cancer were eligible. Participants were selected for interviews if they self-reported low (0-3/10) or high (6-10/10) levels of distress on a previous survey. Participants were interviewed about their experiences. Interviews were transcribed, coded and categorised using thematic data analysis methodology. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were interviewed. Seven had prostate cancer, six bladder cancer and five kidney cancer. Six themes were derived from the interviews: (1) arriving at cancer diagnosis was hard enough, (2) response to treatment delay, (3) labelling cancer surgery as elective, (4) fear of COVID-19 infection, (5) quality of patient-provider relationship and communication and (6) what could have been done differently. CONCLUSION: These findings offer insight into the concerns of patients with genitourinary cancers who experienced treatment delays due to COVID-19. This information can be applied to support patients with cancers more broadly, should treatment delays occur in the future.

A multi-modal study examining long-term bowel, urinary, and sexual function after rectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Many rectal cancer survivors experience persistent bowel, urinary, and sexual dysfunction. A better understanding of their lived experience can help guide survivorship care. METHODS: Multi-modal study of patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery from 2015 to 2019 at a single institution. Surveys and qualitative interviews were used to describe patients' postoperative symptom burden and its impact on their quality of life. RESULTS: The total number of survey respondents was 188 (response rate = 63.5%). Among participants, 41.5% reported their bowel habits, bladder habits (7.8%) and sexual function (36.2%) to be a "moderate" or "big problem" in the past four weeks. The lived experiences varied widely even among patients who report similar symptom burden. CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer survivors commonly face lasting symptoms that negatively impact their quality of life for years after surgery. Additional support extending beyond the perioperative period is needed for patients with persistent dysfunction.

Completeness of operative reports for rectal cancer surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Synoptic operative reporting has been shown to improve completeness and consistency in surgical documentation. We sought to determine whether operative reports contain the key elements recommended by the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer. METHODS: Rectal cancer operative reports from June-December 2018 were submitted from ten hospitals in Michigan. These reports were analyzed to identify key elements in the synoptic operative template and assessed for completeness. RESULTS: In total, 110 operative reports were reviewed. Thirty-one (28%) reports contained all 24 elements; all of these reports used a synoptic template. Overall, 62 (56%) reports used a synoptic template and 48 (44%) did not. Using a synoptic template significantly improved documentation, as these reports contained 92% of required elements, compared to 39% for narrative reports (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION: Narrative operative reports inconsistently document rectal cancer resection. This study provides evidence that synoptic reporting will improve quality of documentation for rectal cancer surgery.

The influence of gastroesophageal reflux symptoms on patient satisfaction after sleeve gastrectomy.

BACKGROUND: Sleeve gastrectomy has become the most common procedure performed for weight loss. But emerging data indicate that this procedure can result in lifestyle-limiting gastroesophageal reflux disease. The influence of these gastroesophageal reflux disease symptoms on patient satisfaction with the procedure has not been explored. METHODS: Using a statewide, bariatric-specific data registry, we studied 6,608 patients who underwent laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy from 2013 to 2017. We used the Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease Health-Related Quality of Life questionnaire, which is 10 questions, each ranging from 0 (no symptoms) to 5 (severe symptoms). To assess the impact of sleeve gastrectomy on patient satisfaction, we calculated the change in this score at baseline versus 1 year after the procedure. We stratified the change in the gastroesophageal reflux disease score into 5 even-sized groups (quintiles). We then examined the relationship between change in the gastroesophageal reflux disease score and patient satisfaction at 1 year. We used generalized linear mixed models to assess the variation in patient satisfaction explained by the change in the gastroesophageal reflux disease score, excess body weight loss at 1 year, and other patient outcomes (serious complications, readmission, and reoperations). We controlled for patient factors (age, sex, race, and comorbidities) and year of sleeve gastrectomy. RESULTS: The average change in the gastroesophageal reflux disease score was 1.62 (range: -48 to 48); however, the change in the gastroesophageal reflux disease score varied across quintiles with a -7.3-point (range: -48 to -3) worsening in the bottom quintile versus a 2.6-point (range: 7 to 48) improvement in the top quintile. Overall, 77.7% of patients were satisfied, but the proportion of patients satisfied was highly dependent on whether their reflux symptoms improved or worsened. Only 48.9% in the bottom quintile were satisfied, compared with 78.1% in the top quintile (<.0001). In the multivariate model, changes in patient-reported gastroesophageal reflux disease score were the most predictive of patient satisfaction, explaining 10.1% of the variation in 1 year satisfaction. Among patients in the bottom quintile, reflux symptoms explained 30.2% of variation compared with 2.3% in quintiles with little change or improvement in reflux. Moreover, excess body weight loss explained only 2% of variation in satisfaction and <1% was explained by patient outcomes (serious complications, readmissions, reoperations, or surgical complications). CONCLUSION: In this statewide study of sleeve gastrectomy, we demonstrated that gastroesophageal reflux symptoms are an important determinant of 1 year satisfaction, particularly among patients whose symptoms worsened the most.