Current Status of Hernia Centres Around the Globe

Online information for incisional hernia repair: What are patients reading?

PURPOSE

Patients increasingly access online materials for health-related information. Using validated assessment tools, we aim to assess the quality and readability of online information for patients considering incisional hernia (IH) repair.

METHODS

The top three online search engines (Google, Bing, Yahoo) were searched in July 2022 for "Incisional hernia repair" and "Surgical hernia repair". Included websites were classified as academic, hospital-affiliated, commercial, and unspecified. The quality of information was assessed using the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) benchmark criteria (0-4), DISCERN instrument (16-80), and the presence of Health On the Net code (HONcode) certification. Readability was assessed using the Flesch Reading Ease (FRE) and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL) tests.

RESULTS

25 unique websites were included. The average JAMA and DISCERN scores of all websites were 0.68 ± 1.02 and 36.50 ± 10.91, respectively. Commercial sites showed a significantly higher DISCERN mean score than academic sites (p = 0.034), while no significant difference was demonstrated between other website categories. 3 (12%) websites reported HONcode certification and had significantly higher JAMA (p = 0.016) and DISCERN (p = 0.045) mean scores than sites without certification. Average FRE and FKGL scores were 39.84 ± 13.11 and 10.62 ± 1.76, respectively, corresponding to college- and high school-level comprehensibility.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest online patient resources on IH repair are of poor overall quality and may not be comprehensible to the public. Patients accessing internet resources for additional information on IH repair should be made aware of these inadequacies and directed to sites bearing HONcode certification.

Comparison of hernia registries: the CORE project

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the international CORE project was to explore the databases of the existing hernia registries and compare them in content and outcome variables.

METHODS

The CORE project was initiated with representatives from all established hernia registries (Danish Hernia Database, Swedish Hernia Registry, Herniamed, EuraHS, Club Hernie, EVEREG, AHSQC) in March 2015 in Berlin. The following categories were used to compare the registries: initiation and funding, data collection and use for certification of hernia centers, patient data and data protection, operative data, registration of complications and follow-up data.

RESULTS

The Danish Hernia Database is the only one to qualify as a genuine national registry where participation is compulsory for entry of all procedures by all surgeons performing a hernia operation. All other registries have to be considered as voluntary and completeness of data depends upon the participating hospitals and surgeons. Only the Danish Hernia Database and the Swedish Hernia Registry are publicly funded. All other registries are reliant on financial support from the medical technology industry. As an incentive for voluntary participation in a hernia registry, hospitals or surgeons are issued a certificate confirming that they are taking part in a quality assurance study for hernia surgery. Due to data protection and privacy regulations, most registries are obliged or have chosen to enter their patient data anonymously or coded. The Danish Hernia Database and Swedish Hernia Registry utilize a national personal patient code. In the Herniamed Registry, patient data are saved in a coded and anonymous format after obtaining the patient's informed consent.

CONCLUSION

Despite the differences in the way data are collected for each of the listed hernia registries, the data are indispensable in clinical research.

Defining the characteristics of certified hernia centers in Italy: The Italian society of hernia and abdominal wall surgery workgroup consensus on systematic reviews of the best available evidences

BACKGROUND

The terms "Hernia Center" (HC) and Hernia Surgeon" (HS) have gained more and more popularity in recent years. Nevertheless, there is lack of protocols and methods for certification of their activities and results. The Italian Society of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery proposes a method for different levels of certification.

METHODS

The national board created a commission, with the task to define principles and structure of an accreditation program. The discussion of each topic was preceded by a Systematic Review, according to PRISMA Guidelines and Methodology. In case of lack or inadequate data from literature, the parameter was fixed trough a Commission discussion.

RESULTS

The Commission defined a certification process including: "FLC - First level Certification": restricted to single surgeon, it is given under request and proof of a formal completion of the learning curve process for the basic procedures and an adequate year volume of operations. "Second level certification": Referral Center for Abdominal Wall Surgery. It is a public or private structure run by at least two already certified and confirmed FLC surgeons. "Third level certification": High Specialization Center for Abdominal Wall Surgery. It is a public or private structure, already confirmed as Referral Centers, run by at least three surgeons (two certified and confirmed with FLC and one research fellow in abdominal wall surgery). Both levels of certification have to meet the Surgical Requirements and facilities criteria fixed by the Commission.

CONCLUSION

The creation of different types of Hernia Centers is directed to create two different entities offering the same surgical quality with separate mission: the Referral Center being more dedicated to clinical and surgical activity and High Specialization Centers being more directed to scientific tasks.