Establishing Regionalized Acute Care Across a Health Care System to Decentralize Postoperative Care After Oncologic Surgery.

PURPOSE: Patients undergoing oncologic surgery at major referral centers frequently experience postdischarge care fragmentation, which has been associated with poor outcomes. This report describes and evaluates the outcomes of an intervention at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) to decentralize postdischarge postoperative acute care within our health care system. METHODS: In 2018, MSKCC completed the addition of six regional acute care clinics called symptom care clinics (SCCs) to existing regional outpatient clinics. Acute care was previously only available within our system at a single centralized urgent care center (UCC). All patients undergoing surgery in our system between January 1, 2019, and June 30, 2021, were followed for 90 days. The exposure was the site of initial acute care presentation-UCC or SCC-and outcomes included utilization, access, financial toxicity, and mortality. Mortality was adjusted using hierarchical modeling at the level of the region. RESULTS: A total of 6,992 postsurgical patients experienced 10,525 acute care visits in our system within 90 days of surgery. Twenty-nine percent of these patients presented to the SCC first. These patients were older but had fewer comorbidities and shorter index length of stay compared with UCC patients. Utilization of SCCs increased substantially while UCC utilization decreased during a period of stable case volume. SCCs were closer to patients' homes, and wait times were shorter. Rates of financial toxicity were similar between groups. Of this high-risk cohort accessing acute care postoperatively, 90-day mortality was similar for UCC and SCC patients (P = .731). CONCLUSION: This model of decentralized acute care after oncologic surgery was increasingly used over time with comparable patient safety. Health systems should emphasize patient-centered care by supporting safe strategies for regionalized care even when treatments are delivered at centralized referral centers.

A Review of Resection and Surgical Ablation for Primary and Secondary Liver Cancers.

The surgical management of primary and secondary liver tumors is constantly evolving. Patient selection, particularly with regard to determining resectability, is vital to the success of programs directed toward invasive treatments of liver tumors. Particular attention should be paid toward determining whether patients are best served with surgical resection or ablative therapies. A multidisciplinary approach is necessary to provide optimal care to patients with liver malignancy.

Care Fragmentation and Mortality in Readmission after Surgery for Hepatopancreatobiliary and Gastric Cancer: A Patient-Level and Hospital-Level Analysis of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Administrative Database.

BACKGROUND: Hepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) and gastric oncologic operations are frequently performed at referral centers. Postoperatively, many patients experience care fragmentation, including readmission to "outside hospitals" (OSH), which is associated with increased mortality. Little is known about patient-level and hospital-level variables associated with this mortality difference. STUDY DESIGN: Patients undergoing HPB or gastric oncologic surgery were identified from select states within the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project database (2006-2014). Follow-up was 90 days after discharge. Analyses used Kruskal-Wallis test, Youden index, and multilevel modeling at the hospital level. RESULTS: There were 7,536 patients readmitted within 90 days of HPB or gastric oncologic surgery to 636 hospitals; 28% of readmissions (n = 2,123) were to an OSH, where 90-day readmission mortality was significantly higher: 8.0% vs 5.4% (p < 0.01). Patients readmitted to an OSH lived farther from the index surgical hospital (median 24 miles vs 10 miles; p < 0.01) and were readmitted later (median 25 days after discharge vs 12; p < 0.01). These variables were not associated with readmission mortality. Surgical complications managed at an OSH were associated with greater readmission mortality: 8.4% vs 5.7% (p < 0.01). Hospitals with <100 annual HPB and gastric operations for benign or malignant indications had higher readmission mortality (6.4% vs 4.7%, p = 0.01), although this was not significant after risk-adjustment (p = 0.226). CONCLUSIONS: For readmissions after HPB and gastric oncologic surgery, travel distance and timing are major determinants of care fragmentation. However, these variables are not associated with mortality, nor is annual hospital surgical volume after risk-adjustment. This information could be used to determine safe sites of care for readmissions after HPB and gastric surgery. Further analysis is needed to explore the relationship between complications, the site of care, and readmission mortality.

Surgical Therapy for Pediatric Hepatoblastoma in the USA over the Last Decade: Analysis of the National Cancer Database.

INTRODUCTION: Hepatoblastoma (HB) is a rare childhood malignancy with hepatic resection (HR) or liver transplantation (LT) providing the best chance of cure. In this study, we analyze the National Cancer Database lacks (NCDB) to compare outcomes following HR and LT for HB. METHODS: Review of the US experience with surgical (HR and LT) management of pediatric (< 18 years) HB over the last decade (2004-2014) using data extracted from the NCDB. RESULTS: A total of 628 children underwent surgical treatment for HB during the study period: HR in 525 (83.6%) and LT in 103 (16.4%). The two groups were comparable for age, sex, race, tumor size, and metastatic disease at initial diagnosis. LT group had significantly higher number of patients with bilobar disease (40 vs 21%; p < 0.001), longer median time from diagnosis to surgery (120 vs 78 days; p < 0.001), and longer post-operative length of stay (LOS) (14 vs 6 days; p < 0.001). There were no differences in rates of 30-day readmission and 30- or 90-day mortality between groups. Both groups had comparable 5-year overall survival (OS) (84.1% HR vs 80.0% LT; p = 0.4). Univariate analysis identified metastatic disease at initial presentation (HR 2.56, CI 1.51-4.35) and age ≥ 4 years (HR 2.68, CI 1.5-4.7) as risk factors for worse overall 5-yr OS, while administration of adjuvant chemotherapy was associated with improved 5-yr OS (92.3% with chemo vs 85.4% without chemo; HR 0.51, CI 0.31-0.84). CONCLUSION: The outcome of HB has improved compared with historical controls. Age at presentation, metastatic disease, and post-operative chemotherapy impact outcomes.

Simplified risk prediction indices do not accurately predict 30-day death or readmission after discharge following colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Risk-prediction indices are one category of the many tools implemented to guide efforts to decrease readmissions. However, using fied models to predict a complex process can prove challenging. In addition, no risk-prediction index has been developed for patients undergoing colorectal surgery. Therefore, we evaluated the performance of a widely utilized simplified index developed at the hospital level - LACE (length of stay, acute admission, Charlson comorbidity index score, and emergency department visits) and developed and evaluated a novel index in predicting readmissions in this patient population. METHODS: Using a retrospective split-sample cohort, patients discharged after colorectal surgery were identified within the inpatient databases of the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project for the states of New York, California, and Florida (2006-2014). The primary outcome was death or readmission within 30 days after discharge. Multivariable logistic regression models incorporated patient comorbidities, postoperative complications, and hospitalization details, and were evaluated using the C statistic. RESULTS: A total of 440,742 patients met eligibility criteria. The rate of death or readmission within 30 days after discharge was 14.0% (n = 61,757). When applied to surgical patients, the LACE index demonstrated a poor model fit (C = 0.631). The model fit improved significantly-but remained poor (C = 0.654; P < .001)-with the addition of the following variables, which are known to be associated with readmission after colorectal surgery: age, indication for surgery, and creation of a new ostomy. A novel, simplified model also yielded a poor model fit (C = 0.660). CONCLUSION: Postdischarge death or readmission after colorectal surgery is not accurately modeled using existing, modified, or novel simplified risk prediction models. Payers and providers must ensure that quality improvement efforts applying simplified models to complex processes, such as readmissions following colorectal surgery, may not be appropriate, and that models reflect the relevant patient population.

Optimal extent of surgical and pathologic lymph node evaluation for resected intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Lymph node (LN) status is an important predictor of overall survival for resected IHCC, yet guidelines for the extent of LN dissection are not evidence-based. We evaluated whether the number of LNs resected at the time of surgery is associated with overall survival for IHCC. METHODS: Patients undergoing curative-intent (R0 or R1) resection for IHCC between 2004 and 2012 were identified within the US National Cancer Database. LN thresholds were evaluated using maximal chi-square testing and five-year overall survival was modeled using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regressions. RESULTS: 57% (n = 1,132) of 2,000 patients had one or more LNs resected and pathologically examined. In the 631 patients undergoing R0 resection with pN0 disease, maximal chi-square testing identified ≥3 LNs as the threshold most closely associated with overall survival. Only 39% of resections reached this threshold. On multivariable survival analysis, no threshold of LNs was associated with overall survival, including ≥3 LNs (p = 0.186) and the current American Joint Committee on Cancer recommendation of ≥6 LNs (p = 0.318). CONCLUSION: In determining the extent of lymphadenectomy at the time of curative-intent resection for IHCC, surgeons should carefully consider the prognostic yield in the absence of overall survival benefit.

Surgeon Variation in Intraoperative Supply Cost for Pancreaticoduodenectomy: Is Intraoperative Supply Cost Associated with Outcomes?

BACKGROUND: With increased scrutiny on the quality and cost of health care, surgeons must be mindful of their outcomes and resource use. We evaluated surgeon-specific intraoperative supply cost (ISC) for pancreaticoduodenectomy and examined whether ISC was associated with patient outcomes. STUDY DESIGN: Patients undergoing open pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2012 and March 2015 were included. Outcomes were tracked prospectively through postoperative day 90, and ISC was defined as the facility cost of single-use surgical items and instruments, plus facility charges for multiuse equipment. Multivariate logistic regression was used to test associations between ISC and patient outcomes using repeated measures at the surgeon level. RESULTS: There were 249 patients who met inclusion criteria. Median ISC was $1,882 (interquartile range [IQR] $1,497 to $2,281). Case volume for 6 surgeons ranged from 18 to 66. Median surgeon-specific ISC ranged from $1,496 to $2,371. Greater case volume was associated with decreased ISC (p < 0.001). Overall, ISC was not predictive of postoperative complications (p = 0.702) or total hospitalization expenditures (p = 0.195). At the surgeon level, surgeon-specific ISC was not associated with the surgeon-specific incidence of severe complication or any wound infection (p > 0.227 for both), but was associated with delayed gastric emptying (p = 0.004) and postoperative pancreatic fistula (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a single-institution cohort of 249 pancreaticoduodenectomies, high-volume surgeons tended to be low-cost surgeons. Across the cohort, ISC was not associated with outcomes. At the surgeon level, associations were noted between ISC and complications, but these may be attributable to unmeasured differences in the postoperative management of patients. These findings suggest that quality improvement efforts to restructure resource use toward more cost-effective practice may not affect patient outcomes, although prospective monitoring of safety and effectiveness must be of the utmost concern.

Utility of a multidisciplinary tumor board in the management of pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal diseases: an observational study.

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES: Multidisciplinary tumor boards (MDTBs) are frequently employed in cancer centers but their value has been debated. We reviewed the decision-making process and resource utilization of our MDTB to assess its utility in the management of pancreatic and upper gastrointestinal tract conditions. METHODS: A prospectively-collected database was reviewed over a 12-month period. The primary outcome was change in management plan as a result of case discussion. Secondary outcomes included resources required to hold MDTB, survival, and adherence to treatment guidelines. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy cases were reviewed. MDTB resulted in a change in the proposed plan of management in 101 of 402 evaluable cases (25.1%). New plans favored obtaining additional diagnostic workup. No recorded variables were associated with a change in plan. For newly-diagnosed cases of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (n = 33), survival time was not impacted by MDTB (p = .154) and adherence to National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines was 100%. The estimated cost of physician time per case reviewed was $190. CONCLUSIONS: Our MDTB influences treatment decisions in a sizeable number of cases with excellent adherence to national guidelines. However, this requires significant time expenditure and may not impact outcomes. Regular assessments of the effectiveness of MDTBs should be undertaken.

Operative Site Drainage after Hepatectomy: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis Using the American College of Surgeons NSQIP Targeted Hepatectomy Database.

BACKGROUND: Operative site drainage (OSD) after elective hepatectomy remains widely used despite data suggesting limited benefit. Multi-institutional, quality-driven databases and analytic techniques offer a unique source from which the utility of OSD can be assessed. STUDY DESIGN: Elective hepatectomies from the 2014 American College of Surgeons (ACS) NSQIP Targeted Hepatectomy Database were propensity score matched on the use of OSD using preoperative and intraoperative variables. The influence of OSD on the diagnosis of postoperative bile leaks, rates of subsequent intervention, and other outcomes within 30 days were assessed using paired testing. RESULTS: Operative site drainage was used in 42.2% of 2,583 eligible hepatectomies. There were 1,868 cases matched, with 7.2% experiencing a post-hepatectomy bile leak. The incidence of bile leak initially requiring intervention was no different between the OSD and no OSD groups (n = 32 vs n = 24, p = 0.278), and OSD was associated with a greater number of drainage procedures to manage post-hepatectomy bile leak (n = 27 in the OSD group, n = 13 in the no OSD group, p = 0.034, relative risk [RR] 2.1 [95% CI 1.1 to 4.0]). The OSD group had a greater mean length of stay (+0.8 days, p = 0.004) and more 30-day readmissions (p < 0.001, RR 1.6 [95% CI 1.2 to 2.1]). On multivariate analysis, post-hepatectomy bile leak and receipt of additional drainage procedures were stronger predictors of increased length of stay and readmissions than OSD. CONCLUSIONS: In a propensity score matched cohort, OSD did not improve the rate of diagnosis of major bile leaks and was associated with increased interventions, greater length of stay, and more 30-day readmissions. These data suggest that routine OSD after elective hepatectomy may not be helpful in capturing clinically relevant bile leaks and has additional consequences.

Cost variation in a laparoscopic cholecystectomy and the association with outcomes across a single health system: implications for standardization and improved resource utilization.

BACKGROUND: Payers and regulatory bodies are increasingly placing emphasis on cost containment, quality/outcome measurement and transparent reporting. Significant cost variation occurs in many operative procedures without a clear relationship with outcomes. Clear cost-benefit associations will be necessary to justify expenditures in the era of bundled payment structures. METHODS: All laparoscopic cholecystectomies (LCCKs) performed within a single health system over a 1-year period were analysed for operating room (OR) supply cost. The cost was correlated with American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) outcomes. RESULTS: From July 2013 to June 2014, 2178 LCCKs were performed by 55 surgeons at seven hospitals. The median case OR supply cost was $513 ± 156. There was variation in cost between individual surgeons and within an individual surgeon's practice. There was no correlation between cost and ACS NSQIP outcomes. The majority of cost variation was explained by selection of trocar and clip applier constructs. CONCLUSIONS: Significant case OR cost variation is present in LCCK across a single health system, and there is no clear association between increased cost and NSQIP outcomes. Placed within the larger context of overall cost, the opportunity exists for improved resource utilization with no obvious risk for a reduction in the quality of care.

The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 96.

The popularity of the term "integrated curriculum" has grown immensely in medical education over the last two decades, but what does this term mean and how do we go about its design, implementation, and evaluation? Definitions and application of the term vary greatly in the literature, spanning from the integration of content within a single lecture to the integration of a medical school's comprehensive curriculum. Taking into account the integrated curriculum's historic and evolving base of knowledge and theory, its support from many national medical education organizations, and the ever-increasing body of published examples, we deem it necessary to present a guide to review and promote further development of the integrated curriculum movement in medical education with an international perspective. We introduce the history and theory behind integration and provide theoretical models alongside published examples of common variations of an integrated curriculum. In addition, we identify three areas of particular need when developing an ideal integrated curriculum, leading us to propose the use of a new, clarified definition of "integrated curriculum", and offer a review of strategies to evaluate the impact of an integrated curriculum on the learner. This Guide is presented to assist educators in the design, implementation, and evaluation of a thoroughly integrated medical school curriculum.