The impact of operative time on complications after plastic surgery: a multivariate regression analysis of 1753 cases.

BACKGROUND: Little evidence within plastic surgery literature supports the precept that longer operative times lead to greater morbidity. OBJECTIVE: The authors investigate surgery duration as a determinant of morbidity, with the goal of defining a clinically relevant time for increased risk. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted of patients who underwent a broad range of complex plastic surgical procedures (n = 1801 procedures) at UT Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, Texas, from January 1, 2008 to January 31, 2012. Adjusting for possible confounders, multivariate logistic regression assessed surgery duration as an independent predictor of morbidity. To define a cutoff for increased risk, incidence of complications was compared among quintiles of surgery duration. Stratification by type of surgery controlled for procedural complexity. RESULTS: A total of 1753 cases were included in multivariate analyses with an overall complication rate of 27.8%. Most operations were combined (75.8%), averaging 4.9 concurrent procedures. Each hour increase in surgery duration was associated with a 21% rise in odds of morbidity (P < .0001). Compared with the first quintile of operative time (<2.0 hours), there was no change in complications until after 3.1 hours of surgery (odds ratio, 1.6; P = .017), with progressively greater odds increases of 3.1 times after 4.5 hours (P < .0001) and 4.7 times after 6.8 hours (P < .0001). When stratified by type of surgery, longer operations continued to be associated with greater morbidity. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery duration is an independent predictor of complications, with a significantly increased risk above 3 hours. Although procedural complexity undoubtedly affects morbidity, operative time should factor into surgical decision making.

Impact of pen utilization on insulin cost reduction in long-term care facilities.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact on insulin acquisition cost of a pharmacy program to convert insulin utilization from multidose vials to pen-delivery systems for long-term care residents covered by Medicare Part A, and managed care plans. DESIGN: Retrospective cost comparison. SETTING: Long-term care facilities. PATIENTS: Residents covered by Medicare Part A and managed care plans. INTERVENTIONS: Policy to replace insulin vials with pen devices, effective July 2009. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mean insulin cost-per-patient day (total insulin purchases divided by patient admission days) and pen utilization (pen purchases as a percent of total insulin purchases). RESULTS: Insulin purchase data covered 2,405 admissions in 75 facilities over the 12-month period ending June 2010. Pen device purchases increased from less than 1% to almost 35% of total insulin purchases over the study period during which insulin cost per patient-day declined from $10.29 to $4.08. For Medicare Part A patients with admissions of 30 days or fewer, the most frequent visit type, mean cost per patient-day decreased from $13.73 to $9.19 as pen purchases increased from less than 1% to about 32%. For these same patients, mean cost per patient-day for admissions using only pen devices was $7.04, compared with $11.79 for admissions using only vials (P < 0.001). Significant differences in mean cost per patient-day were also found for residents covered by managed care and for longer admissions. CONCLUSION: Total insulin costs can be reduced through higher utilization of pen devices by patients in long-term care facilities.

A comparison of outcomes involving highly cohesive, form-stable breast implants from two manufacturers in patients undergoing primary breast augmentation.

BACKGROUND: Although there have been reports of single-surgeon outcomes with highly cohesive, form-stable silicone gel implants in women undergoing primary breast augmentation, there has been only one study published that compares the outcomes between the Allergan 410 and the Mentor CPG devices. OBJECTIVES: The goal of the study is to compare outcomes in each cohort and to determine if quality systems and processes would have an impact on lowering the surgical revision rate, as compared to published reports for round gel implants and form-stable implants. METHODS: Patients selected for the study were required to meet predefined inclusion criteria and general indications for breast augmentation. All subjects were treated uniformly with extensive informed consent prior to surgery. The entire process of breast augmentation (patient assessment, informed consent, the surgical procedure itself and postoperative instructions) was identical between the two groups. Patients were not randomized, as the studies did not start at the same time. The process for management of each patient was based on adaptation of the Toyota Production System and Lean Manufacturing, with emphasis on achieving operational excellence in the use of planning templates for surgery, including accurate management of patient expectations regarding size outcome. RESULTS: Outcomes data included physical breast measurements, quality of life metrics, and patient/surgeon satisfaction assessment. Adverse events were compared against published data for breast implants. Follow-up ranged between 20-77 months (Allergan 410) and 16-77 months (Mentor CPG). The outcome data indicate that these devices produce natural-appearing breasts with extremely low aggregate reoperation rate (4.2%). Only 0.8% of the reoperations were attributable to surgeon-related factors. There were no reoperations to correct mismanaged size expectations during the course of each study. There were 13 pregnancies and no difficulties with lactation were reported. Rippling (lateral/medial, palpable and/or visible) was encountered in both cohorts. The Mentor CPG cohort had a fivefold greater incidence of rippling (37.3% versus 7.6% in Allergan 410 cohort). This was highly statistically significant (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Provided that there is adherence to core principles and avoidance of errors in planning, patient expectations, and surgery, highly cohesive, form-stable breast implants can deliver excellent long term outcomes in primary breast augmentation in a diverse patient population. The impact of quality processes such as Toyota Production System and Lean Manufacturing was substantive in delivering operational excellence in primary breast augmentation.