"I don't know if I can keep doing this": a qualitative investigation of surgeon burnout and opportunities for organization-level improvement.

Introduction: Burnout is a pressing issue within surgical environments, bearing considerable consequences for both patients and surgeons alike. Given its prevalence and the unique contextual factors within academic surgical departments, it is critical that efforts are dedicated to understanding this issue. Moreover, active involvement of surgeons in these investigations is critical to ensure viability and uptake of potential strategies in their local setting. Thus, the purpose of this study was to explore surgeons' experiences with burnout and identify strategies to mitigate its drivers at the level of the organization. Methods: A qualitative case study was conducted by recruiting surgeons for participation in a cross-sectional survey and semi-structured interviews. Data collected were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis, which was informed by the Areas of Worklife Model. Results: Overall, 28 unique surgeons participated in this study; 11 surgeons participated in interviews and 22 provided responses through the survey. Significant contributors to burnout identified included difficulties providing adequate care to patients due to limited resources and time available in academic medical centers and the moral injury associated with these challenges. The inequitable remuneration associated with education, administration, and leadership roles as a result of the Fee-For-Service model, as well as issues of gender inequity and the individualistic culture prevalent in surgical specialties were also described as contributing factors. Participants suggested increasing engagement between hospital leadership and staff to ensure surgeons are able to access resources to care for their patients, reforming payment plans and workplace polities to address issues of inequity, and improving workplace social dynamics as strategies for addressing burnout. Discussion: The high prevalence and negative sequalae of burnout in surgery necessitates the formation of targeted interventions to address this issue. A collaborative approach to developing interventions to improve burnout among surgeons may lead to feasible and sustainable solutions.

Intraoperative predictors of appendiceal abnormalities in patients with mucinous ovarian neoplasms.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate intraoperative factors predicting appendiceal pathology during gynecologic oncology surgery for suspected mucinous ovarian neoplasms. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study on 225 patients with mucinous ovarian neoplasms who underwent surgery for an adnexal mass with concurrent appendectomy between 2000 and 2018. Regression analyses were used to evaluate intraoperative factors, such as frozen section of the ovarian mass and surgeon's impression of the appendix in predicting appendiceal pathology. RESULTS: Most patients (77.8%) had a normal appendix on final pathology. Abnormal appendix cases (n = 26) included: metastasis from high-grade adenocarcinoma of the ovary (n = 1), neuroendocrine tumor of the appendix (n = 4), and low-grade appendiceal mucinous neoplasms (n = 26; 23 associated with a mucinous ovarian adenocarcinoma, 2 with a benign mucinous ovarian cystadenoma, and 1 with a borderline mucinous ovarian tumor). Combining normal intraoperative appearance of the appendix with benign or borderline frozen section yielded a negative predictive value of 85.1%, with 14.9% of patients being misclassified, and 6.0% having a neuroendocrine tumor or low-grade appendiceal neoplasm. CONCLUSION: Benign or borderline frozen section of an ovarian mucinous neoplasm and normal appearing appendix have limited predictive value for appendiceal pathology. Appendectomy with removal of the mesoappendix should be considered in all cases of mucinous ovarian neoplasm, regardless of intraoperative findings.

Identification and Adjudication of Adverse Events Following Rectal Cancer Surgery: Observational Case Series in a Region of Ontario, Canada.

BACKGROUND: For patients undergoing rectal cancer surgery, we evaluated whether suboptimal preoperative surgeon evaluation of resection margins is a latent condition factor-a factor that is common, unrecognized, and may increase the risk of certain adverse events, including local tumour recurrence, positive surgical margin, nontherapeutic surgery, and in-hospital mortality. METHODS: In this observational case series of patients who underwent rectal cancer surgery during 2016 in Local Health Integrated Network 4 region of Ontario (population 1.4 million), chart review and a trigger tool were used to identify patients who experienced the adverse events. An expert panel adjudicated whether each event was preventable or nonpreventable and identified potential contributing factors to adverse events. RESULTS: Among 173 patients, 25 (14.5%) had an adverse event and 13 cases (7.5%) were adjudicated as preventable. Rate of surgeon awareness of preoperative margin status was low at 50% and similar among cases with and without an adverse event (p = 0.29). Suboptimal surgeon preoperative evaluation of surgical margins was adjudicated a contributing factor in all 11 preventable local recurrence, positive margin, and nontherapeutic surgery cases. Failure to rescue was judged a contributing factor in the two cases with preventable in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Suboptimal surgeon preoperative evaluation of surgical margins in rectal cancer is likely a latent condition factor. Optimizing margin evaluation may be an efficient quality improvement target.

Propofol administration by endoscopists versus anesthesiologists in gastrointestinal endoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of patient safety outcomes.

BACKGROUND: With a growing demand for endoscopic services, the role of anesthesiologists in endoscopy units must be reassessed. The aim of this study was to compare patient outcomes in non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol (NAAP) versus anesthesiologist-administered propofol (AAP) during routine endoscopy. METHODS: We systematically searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL and the grey literature for studies comparing NAAP and AAP. Primary outcomes included endoscopy- and sedation-related complications. Secondary outcomes included measures of endoscopy quality and of patient and endoscopist satisfaction. We reported treatment effects using random-effects models. RESULTS: Of 602 articles identified, 5 met the inclusion criteria. Most studies included only patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification of I or II. Non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol did not result in increased rates of airway intervention (odds ratio [OR] 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.29 to 3.95; 3443 patients) or hypotension (OR 1.47, 95% CI 0.40 to 5.41; 17 978 patients) but did result in higher rates of bradycardia (OR 3.68, 95% CI 1.65 to 8.17; 17 978 patients). Nonanesthesiologists administered lower propofol dosages than anesthesiologists (mean difference -61.79, 95% CI -114.46 to -9.12; 3443 patients), and their patients more commonly experienced awareness with recall (OR 19.99, 95% CI 7.88 to 50.76; 2090 patients). However, NAAP neither compromised patient willingness to repeat the procedure (OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.83; 2367 patients) nor lengthened total procedure time (mean difference -0.08, 95% CI -3.51 to 3.34; 2367 patients). CONCLUSION: Endoscopists may safely administer propofol without compromising procedural quality in patients classified as ASA I or II undergoing routine endoscopy. The results of this meta-analysis are limited by a lack of available high-quality studies. Further, large-scale studies are needed for definitive conclusions.

CONTEXTE: Étant donné que les services endoscopiques sont de plus en plus demandés, le rôle des anesthésiologistes dans les unités d'endoscopie doit être réévalué. Le but de cette étude était de comparer les résultats cliniques chez les patients selon que le propofol était administré par des non-anesthésiologistes (NAAP, pour non-anesthesiologist-administered propofol) ou par des anesthésiologistes (AAP, pour anesthesiologist-administered propofol). MÉTHODES: Nous avons procédé à une revue systématique des réseaux MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Web of Science et CENTRAL et de la littérature grise pour recenser les études ayant comparé les méthodes NAAP et AAP. Les paramètres principaux incluaient les complications liées à l'endoscopie et à la sédation, et les paramètres secondaires incluaient les mesures de la qualité de l'endoscopie et la satisfaction des patients et des endoscopistes. Nous avons fait état des effets des traitements à l'aide de modèles à effets aléatoires. RÉSULTATS: Sur les 602 articles recensés, 5 répondaient aux critères d'inclusion. La plupart des études incluaient uniquement des patients présentant une classe ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) I ou II. Le propofol administré par des non-anesthésiologistes n'a pas donné lieu à un taux accru d'interventions touchant les voies respiratoires (rapport des cotes [RC] 1,07, intervalle de confiance [IC] de 95 %, 0,29 à 3,95; 3443 patients) ou d'hypotension (RC 1,47, IC de 95 %, 0,40 à 5,41; 17 978 patients), mais a donné lieu à des taux plus élevés de bradycardie (RC 3,68, IC de 95 %, 1,65 à 8,17; 17 978 patients). Comparativement aux anesthésiologistes, les non-anesthésiologistes ont administré des doses de propofol plus faibles (différence moyenne -61,79, IC de 95 %, -114,46 à -9,12; 3443 patients) et leurs patients ont plus souvent gardé conscience, avec souvenirs post-intervention (RC 19,99, IC à 95 %, 7,88 à 50,76; 2090 patients). Toutefois, la méthode NAAP n'a ni compromis la volonté des patients à répéter l'intervention (RC 0,42, IC à 95 %, 0,10 à 1,83; 2367 patients) ni prolongé la durée totale de l'intervention (différence moyenne −0,08, IC à 95 %, −3,51 à 3,34; 2367 patients). CONCLUSION: Les endoscopistes peuvent administrer le propofol de manière sécuritaire sans compromettre la qualité de l'intervention chez les patients de classe ASA I ou II soumis à une endoscopie de routine. Les résultats de cette méta-analyse sont limités par l'absence d'études de grande qualité. En outre, des études de plus grande envergure sont requises pour arriver à des conclusions définitives.

The effect of simethicone on postoperative ileus in patients undergoing colorectal surgery (SPOT), a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus is a poorly understood multifactorial outcome following colorectal surgery that presents significant clinical challenges and contributes to increased morbidity, length of stay, and healthcare cost. To date, there are few pharmacological interventions that shorten the duration of postoperative ileus. OBJECTIVE: This study is the first to evaluate the efficacy of simethicone in treating postoperative ileus symptoms in patients undergoing colorectal surgery. DESIGN: A multicenter, double-blinded, placebo controlled randomized controlled trial. SETTINGS: This trial was conducted at two academic tertiary care centres in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 118 patients undergoing colorectal surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive either a five-day course of oral simethicone (n = 58) or a placebo (n = 60). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was time to first passage of flatus. Secondary outcomes included time to first bowel movement, postoperative length of stay, and postoperative pain. Statistical analyses were performed on an intention-to-treat basis. Statistical significance set at p = 0.05. RESULTS: The median time to first passage of flatus in simethicone arm was 25.2 h and 26.7 h in controls (P = 0.98). There were no significant differences in the median time to first bowel movement (simethicone = 41.1 h vs. control = 42.9 h, P = 0.91) or median length of hospital stay (simethicone = 4.5 days vs. control = 4.0 days, P = 0.63). CONCLUSIONS: This study failed to show a difference in return of gastrointestinal motility in patients receiving simethicone following colorectal surgery. Postoperative ileus remains a significant clinical and economic burden to the healthcare system and further research is needed to identify a reliable and effective method of treatment.

Development and Early Piloting of a CanMEDS Competency-Based Feedback Tool for Surgical Grand Rounds.

OBJECTIVE: Grand rounds offer an excellent opportunity for the evaluation of medical expertise, and other competencies, such as communication and professionalism. The purpose of this study was to develop a tool that would facilitate the provision of formative feedback for grand rounds to improve learning. The resulting CanMEDS-based evaluation tool was piloted in an academic surgical department. DESIGN: This study employed the use of a 3-phase, qualitatively-focused, embedded mixed methods approach. In Phase 1, an intrinsic case study was conducted to identify preliminary themes. These findings were crystallized using a quantitative survey. Following interpretation of these data, a grand rounds evaluation tool was developed in Phase 2. The tool was piloted in the Phase 3 focus group. SETTING: This study was piloted at an academic surgical center among members of the Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Purposive sampling was used for this study. A total of n = 7 individuals participated in the Phase 1 interviews, and n = 24 participants completed the Phase 1 survey. Participants included a representative sample of medical students, residents, fellows, and staff. The tool was piloted among n = 19 participants. RESULTS: The proposed evaluation tool contains 13 Likert-scale questions and 2 open-ended questions. The tool outlines specific questions to assess grand rounds presenters within the structure of the 7 CanMEDS competency domains. "Evaluation fatigue" was identified as a major barrier in the willingness to provide effective feedback. Further, a number of factors regarding the preferred content, structure, and format of surgical grand rounds were identified. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study presents a CanMEDS-specific evaluation tool that can be applied to surgical grand rounds. With the increasing adoption of competency-based medical education, comprehensive evaluation of surgical activities is required. This form provides a template for the development of competency-based evaluation tools for medical and surgical learning activities.

Dynamic article: combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery for complex colonic polyps: postoperative outcomes and video demonstration of 3 key operative techniques.

BACKGROUND: Combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery is a novel technique that can be used to avoid bowel resection for complex colon polyps that are not amenable to colonoscopic resection. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and outcomes of combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery for complex colonic polyps. DESIGN: This study is a retrospective review of consecutive combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgeries. SETTING: This study was conducted at a single institution. PATIENTS: All patients that underwent combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery for a complex colonic polyp at our center from October 2009 to October 2013 were followed. Each patient's lesion was assessed by a therapeutic endoscopist before referral for combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery, and was deemed unresectable based on size, broad base, or location of the polyp. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Intraoperative and postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, and recurrence were the primary outcomes measured. RESULTS: Thirty consecutive patients underwent combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery. Twenty (66.7%) patients underwent laparoscopic-assisted colonoscopic polyp excision (10 of these excisions were facilitated by Endoloop placement at the polyp base), 9 (30%) patients underwent colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic cecectomy, and 1 (3.3%) patient was converted from a colonoscopic-assisted laparoscopic cecectomy to a laparoscopic ileocolic resection. The median length of hospital stay was 2 days (range, 1-16). Twenty-nine (96.7%) of the final pathology results were benign, with 10 (33.3%) showing high-grade dysplasia. One (3.3%) final pathology result was positive for a well-differentiated adenocarcinoma. This patient subsequently underwent a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy and chemotherapy for node-positive disease. One (3.3%) patient experienced a recurrent benign polyp at the previous excision site, which was removed by colonoscopy. The time to detection of recurrence was 274 days. LIMITATIONS: This study looked at a small group of patients, over a short follow-up period. However, all consecutive patients were captured, and there were no losses to follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Combined endoscopic-laparoscopic surgery for complex benign colonic polyps is a safe procedure, with good clinical outcomes and low recurrence rates.

An Internet-Based Collaborative Cancer Conference for Rectal Cancer Influenced Surgeon Treatment Recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: In many jurisdictions geographic and resource constraints are barriers to multidisciplinary cancer conference review of all patients undergoing cancer surgery. We piloted an internet-based collaborative cancer conference (I-CCC) for rectal cancer to overcome these barriers in the LHIN4 region of Ontario (population 1.4 million). METHODS: Surgeons practicing at one of 10 LHIN4 hospitals were invited to participate in I-CCC reviews. A secure internet audio and visual link facilitated review of cross-sectional images and case details. Before review, referring surgeons detailed initial treatment plans. Main treatment options included preoperative radiation, straight to surgery, and plan uncertain. Changes were noted following I-CCC review from initial to final treatment plan. Major changes included: redirect patient to preoperative radiation from straight to surgery or plan uncertain; and redirect patient to straight to surgery from preoperative radiation or plan uncertain. Minor changes included: change type of neoadjuvant therapy; request additional tests (e.g., pelvic MRI); or formal MCC review. RESULTS: From November 2010 to May 2012, 20 surgeons (7 academic and 13 community) submitted 57 rectal cancer cases for I-CCC review. After I-CCC review, 30 of 57 (53 %) cases had treatment plan changes: 17 major and 13 minor. No patient or tumour factors predicted for treatment plan change. CONCLUSIONS: An I-CCC for rectal cancer in a large geographic region was feasible and influenced surgeon treatment recommendations in 53 % of cases. Because no factor predicted for treatment plan change, it is likely prudent that all rectal cancer patients undergo some form of collaborative review.

Autologous Fat Grafting as a Novel Approach to Parastomal Soft-tissue Volume Deficiencies.

SUMMARY: The aim of this study is to describe a novel approach to revise maladaptive soft-tissue contour around an ileostomy. A patient with permanent ileostomy suffered from significant defects in soft-tissue contour due to scarring and wound contraction. He underwent autologous fat grafting to achieve sealing of his stoma appliance and improve cosmesis. Due to numerous surgeries, the stoma appliance would not seal and required daily appliance changes. The patient received autologous fat grafting to augment the contour around stoma. A complete fitting of stoma was achieved. The patient is satisfied with stoma sealing and is changing his stoma appliance every 5-7 days without skin excoriation. Autologous fat transfer is an effective approach to treat a subset of stoma patients with complex subcutaneous defects.

Hand-assisted laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

The use of laparoscopic techniques in the treatment of colorectal diseases was first described in the early 1990s. Even though its clinical benefits have been well documented, laparoscopic colorectal surgery has been slow to gain adoption in the surgical community, given its technical demands. To help overcome these challenges while preserving the clinical benefits derived from a minimally invasive approach, hand-assisted laparoscopic surgery (HALS) was proposed. HALS can decrease the learning curve by restoring tactile sensation and improving proprioception, and it may be more accessible for surgeons already in practice. A meta-analysis of the 3 published RCTs comparing hand-assisted laparoscopic to conventional laparoscopic colorectal resection showed a significantly lower rate of conversion in the hand-assist patients, while morbidity rates were equivalent. The meta-analysis further indicated that short-term postoperative benefits of conventional laparoscopic colectomies were preserved and costs were likely to be offset by reduced operative time and specific need of laparoscopic equipment. HALS represents a valuable option for performing colorectal resections.

Recurrence after liver resection for hepatocellular carcinoma: risk factors, treatment, and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Tumor recurrence remains the major cause of death after curative resection for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors for the recurrence of HCC and to examine long-term outcomes after resection. METHODS: From July 1992 to July 2004, 193 consecutive patients who underwent hepatic resection as primary therapy with curative intent for HCC were included in this single-center analysis. The perioperative mortality rate was 5%. Time to recurrence (disease-free survival) and overall survival were determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Demographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics were tested for their prognostic significance by univariate and multivariate analysis with the log-rank test and the Cox proportional hazards model, respectively. RESULTS: Median overall survival for the entire cohort was 71 +/- 11 months; disease-free survival was 34 months (range, 1-149 months). After a median follow-up time of 34 months, 98 patients (51%) experienced recurrent cancer; initial tumor recurrence was confined to the liver in 86 patients (88%). With the use of multivariate analysis, preoperative vascular invasion detected on radiologic imaging studies; postoperative vascular invasion found on pathologic assessment, and intermediate and poor tumor differentiation and tumor size and number were significant predictors of disease-free survival. Of the 98 patients who had tumor recurrence, 53 patients (54%) underwent additional therapy (ablation, 31 patients; re-resection, 11 patients; transarterial chemoembolization, 8 patients; liver transplantation, 3 patients) with improvement in survival. CONCLUSION: Despite recurrences in >50% of patients, long-term survival can be achieved after resection of HCC. Identification of risk factors, close follow-up evaluation, and early detection are mandatory because recurrences that are confined to the liver may be amenable to treatment with an additional survival benefit.

Prognosis and results after resection of very large (>or=10 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Few potentially curative treatment options exist besides resection for patients with very large (>or=10 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). We sought to examine the outcomes and risk factors for recurrence after resection of >or=10 cm HCC. METHODS: Perioperative and long-term outcomes were examined for 189 consecutive patients from 1993 to 2004 who underwent potentially curative resection of HCC >or=10 cm (n = 24; 13%) vs. those with HCC <10 cm (n = 165; 87%). Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis and patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were compared using univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Median follow-up was 34 months. Tumors >or=10 cm were more likely to be symptomatic, of poorer grade, and have vascular invasion (p < 0.05). Twelve patients (50%) underwent an extended resection of more than four hepatic segments or resection of adjacent organs for oncologic clearance (diaphragm-2, inferior vena cava (IVC)-2, median sternotomy-1). Postoperative complications were more common after resection of >10 cm HCC (12/24, 50% vs. 35/165, 21%; p = 0.04). Median DFS was significantly shorter in patients with large HCC (>or=10 cm) group compared to patients with smaller HCC (8.4 vs. 38 months; p = 0.001), but overall survival was not different between the two groups (5-year survival 54% vs. 53%; p = 0.43). Seventeen patients (71%) with very large HCC developed recurrences (12 intrahepatic, five systemic); eight of these patients (47%) underwent additional therapy (resection-4, TACE-3, RFA-1). Pathological positive margins and vascular invasion were significant determinants of DFS in tumors >or=10 cm (p < 0.05), but only vascular invasion was an independent risk factor for recurrence after multivariate analysis (HR 0.17; 95% CI: 0.04-0.8). Median OS after recurrence was 24 months. CONCLUSION: Surgical resection is the optimal therapy for very large (>or=10 cm) HCC. Although recurrences are common after resection of these tumors, overall survival was not significantly different from patients after resection of smaller HCC in this series.