Patient decision-making and regret in pilonidal sinus surgery: a mixed-methods study

Lived experience of pilonidal sinus disease: Systematic review and meta-ethnography

AIM

Pilonidal sinus disease (PSD) poses significant treatment challenges due to a lack of consensus on the diverse range of surgical approaches routinely employed, prompting a renewed focus on the patient experience. The aim of this study was to explore the lived experience of patients with PSD to better inform future person-centred treatment.

METHOD

A systematic review was performed to identify papers reporting qualitative studies on the lived experience of PSD. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL databases were searched, using a predefined search strategy. Studies were dual screened at each stage, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Analytical frameworks were extracted, along with supporting quotes. A meta-ethnographic approach was used to systemically compare and synthesize frameworks in line with the eMERGe meta-ethnography protocol. The study was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42024495608).

RESULTS

Four full texts covering three studies were included. Three key themes emerged: (1) disruption to activities of daily living; (2) impact on psychological well-being; (3) navigating healthcare. Reduction of physical activity was patient-led, owing to fears of exacerbating symptoms and wound complications. PSD had a complex influence on self-perception and emotional state, leading to changed relationships with others. This was largely driven by the forced reliance on others for wound care. The final theme highlighted concerns regarding unexpected disease course and outcomes stemming from a lack of patient awareness of PSD.

CONCLUSION

This study informs a more sophisticated understanding of the experience of individuals living with PSD and has identified recommendations that should guide future clinical practice and research.

Decision regret following surgical management of pilonidal disease

AIM

Surgical decision making in the context of pilonidal disease (PD) can be challenging. Current evidence for the management of PD is inadequate and optimum treatment is not clear. This paper reports on patient experience of shared decision making (SDM) and decision regret following surgical management of PD.

METHOD

The Pilonidal Trial. Studying the Treatment Options (PITSTOP) study (ISRCTN95551898) is a prospective cohort study of patients with PD treated between May 2019 and March 2022. This subanalysis reports the results of quantitative data capture between baseline and 6 months post-procedure. Baseline data consisted of patient and disease characteristics, surgical procedure and impression of SDM. Post-procedure data consisted of operative outcomes and decision regret. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to analyse the relationship between clinical outcomes and decision regret.

RESULTS

Overall, 677 patients were included, and follow-up data to 6 months were available for 476 (71%). Most (59.5%) patients underwent major excisional surgery; 45.1% of patients experienced a postoperative complication. Participant impression of SDM was positive, with a median CollaboRATE mean-score response of 3 (interquartile range: 3-4). Of the patients who underwent a 'leave open' approach, 20.6% were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with their treatment. Postoperative complications (β = 3.21, 95% CI: -12.75 to 7.25, p < 0.001) and disease recurrence (β = 11.5, 95% CI: -10.6 to 9.4, p < 0.001) were both associated with higher rates of decision regret.

CONCLUSION

The clinical outcomes, postoperative complications and recurrence, were associated with higher levels of decision regret. Surgeons treating patients with PD should practice SDM and ensure that patient priorities inform treatment approach.

Treatment options for patients with pilonidal sinus disease: PITSTOP, a mixed-methods evaluation

Background

There is no consensus on optimal management of pilonidal disease. Surgical practice is varied, and existing literature is mainly single-centre cohort studies of varied disease severity, interventions and outcome assessments.

Objectives

A prospective cohort study to determine: • disease severity and intervention relationship • most valued outcomes and treatment preference by patients • recommendations for policy and future research.

Design

Observational cohort study with nested mixed-methods case study. Discrete choice experiment. Clinician survey. Three-stage Delphi survey for patients and clinicians. Inter-rater reliability of classification system.

Setting

Thirty-one National Health Service trusts.

Participants

Patients aged > 16 years referred for elective surgical treatment of pilonidal disease.

Interventions

Surgery.

Main outcome measures

Pain postoperative days 1 and 7, time to healing and return to normal activities, complications, recurrence. Outcomes compared between major and minor procedures using regression modelling, propensity score-based approaches and augmented inverse probability weighting to account for measured potential confounding features.

Results

Clinician survey: There was significant heterogeneity in surgeon practice preference. Limited training opportunities may impede efforts to improve practice. Cohort study: Over half of patients (60%; N = 667) had a major procedure. For these procedures, pain was greater on day 1 and day 7 (mean difference day 1 pain 1.58 points, 95% confidence interval 1.14 to 2.01 points, n = 536; mean difference day 7 pain 1.53 points, 95% confidence interval 1.12 to 1.95 points, n = 512). There were higher complication rates (adjusted risk difference 17.5%, 95% confidence interval 9.1 to 25.9%, n = 579), lower recurrence (adjusted risk difference -10.1%, 95% confidence interval -18.1 to -2.1%, n = 575), and longer time to healing (>34 days estimated difference) and time to return to normal activities (difference 25.9 days, 95% confidence interval 18.4 to 33.4 days). Mixed-methods analysis: Patient decision-making was influenced by prior experience of disease and anticipated recovery time. The burden involved in wound care and the gap between expected and actual time for recovery were the principal reasons given for decision regret. Discrete choice experiment: The strongest predictors of patient treatment choice were risk of infection/persistence (attribute importance 70%), and shorter recovery time (attribute importance 30%). Patients were willing to trade off these attributes. Those aged over 30 years had a higher risk tolerance (22.35-34.67%) for treatment failure if they could experience rapid recovery. There was no strong evidence that younger patients were willing to accept higher risk of treatment failure in exchange for a faster recovery. Patients were uniform in rejecting excision-and-leave-open because of the protracted nursing care it entailed. Wysocki classification analysis: There was acceptable inter-rater agreement (κ = 0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.61). Consensus exercise: Five research and practice priorities were identified. The top research priority was that a comparative trial should broadly group interventions. The top practice priority was that any interventions should be less disruptive than the disease itself.

Limitations

Incomplete recruitment and follow-up data were an issue, particularly given the multiple interventions. Assumptions were made regarding risk adjustment.

Conclusions and future work

Results suggest the burden of pilonidal surgery is greater than reported previously. This can be mitigated with better selection of intervention according to disease type and patient desired goals. Results indicate a framework for future higher-quality trials that stratify disease and utilise broad groupings of common interventions with development of a patient-centred core outcome set.

Trial registration

This trial is registered as ISRCTN95551898.

Funding

This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 17/17/02) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 33. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Research and practice priorities in pilonidal sinus disease: a consensus from the PITSTOP study

AIM

Pilonidal sinus disease is a common condition treated by colorectal surgeons. There is a lack of literature in the field to guide optimal management of this condition. As part of the PITSTOP study, we aimed to identify policy and research priorities to provide direction to the field.

METHOD

Patients and surgeons were invited to participate. A 'So what, now what' exercise was conducted, informed by data from PITSTOP. This generated statements for research and practice priorities. A three-round online Delphi study was conducted, ranking statements based on policy and research separately. Statements were rated 1 (not important) to 9 (important). Statements that were rated 7-9 by more than 70% of participants were entered into the consensus meeting. Personalized voting feedback was shown between rounds. A face-to-face meeting was held to discuss statements, and participants were asked to rank statements using a weighted choice vote.

RESULTS

Twenty-two people participated in the focus group, generating 14 research and 19 policy statements. Statements were voted on by 56 participants in round 1, 53 in round 2 and 51 in round 3. A total of 15 policy statements and 19 research statements were discussed in the consensus round. Key policy statements addressed treatment strategies and intensity, surgeon training opportunities, need for classification and the impact of treatment on return to work. Research recommendations included design of future trials, methodology considerations and research questions.

CONCLUSION

This study has identified research and policy priorities in pilonidal sinus disease which are relevant to patients and clinicians. These should inform practice and future research.

An international survey exploring the management of pilonidal disease

AIM

Pilonidal disease (PD) is a common debilitating condition frequently seen in surgical practice. Several available treatments carry different benefit/risk balances. The aim of this study was to snapshot the current management of PD across European countries.

METHOD

Members affiliated to the European Society of Coloproctology were invited to join the survey. An invitation was extended to others via social media. The predictive power of respondents' and hospitals' demographics on the change of therapeutic approach was explored.

RESULTS

Respondents (n = 452) were mostly men (77%), aged 26-60 years, practising in both academic and public hospitals and with fair distribution between colorectal (51%) and general (48%) surgeons. A total of 331 (73%) respondents recommended surgery at first presentation of the disease. Up to 80% of them recommended antibiotic therapy and 95% did not use any classification of PD. A primary closure technique was the preferred procedure (29%), followed by open technique (22%), flap creation (7%), sinusectomy (7%) and marsupialization (7%). Approximately 27% of subjects would choose the same surgical technique even after a failure. Almost half (46%) perform surgery as office based. A conservative approach was negatively associated with acutely presenting PD (p < 0.001). Respondents who were not considering tailored surgery based on patient presentation tended to change their approach in the case of a failed procedure.

CONCLUSION

With the caveat of a heterogeneous number of respondents across countries, the results of our snapshot survey may inform the development of future guidelines.

Application of the theoretical framework of acceptability in a surgical setting: Theoretical and methodological insights

PURPOSE

Methods for assessing acceptability of healthcare interventions have been inconsistent until the development of the theoretical framework of acceptability (TFA). Despite its rapid adoption in healthcare research, the TFA has rarely been used to assess acceptability of surgical interventions. We sought to explore the sufficiency of the TFA in this context and provide methodological guidance to support systematic use of this framework in research.

METHOD

Acceptability was assessed in a consecutive sample of 15 patients at least 3 months post-joint replacement surgery via theory-informed semi-structured interviews. A detailed description of the application of the TFA is reported. This includes: development of the interview guide (including questions to assess theoretical sufficiency), analysis of interview data and interpretation of findings.

RESULTS

Interview data were substantially codable into the TFA constructs but required the addition of a construct, labelled 'perceived safety and risk', and relabelling and redefining an existing construct (new label: 'opportunity costs and gains'). Methodological recommendations for theory-informed interview studies include producing interview support material to enhance precision of the intervention description, conducting background conversations with a range of stakeholders in the healthcare setting, and conducting first inductive and then deductive thematic analysis.

CONCLUSION

The sufficiency of the TFA could be enhanced for use when assessing interventions with an identifiable risk profile, such as surgery, by the inclusion of an additional construct to capture perceptions of risk and safety. We offer these methodological recommendations to guide researchers and facilitate consistency in the application of the TFA in theory-informed interview studies.

A survey of treatment preferences of UK surgeons in the treatment of pilonidal sinus disease

AIM

Pilonidal sinus is a common surgical condition which impacts a young and economically active population. There are limited data to guide treatment in this condition. The aim of this work was to assess current practice.

METHOD

A survey was developed as part of the PITSTOP study. It included questions on volume of practice, treatment preferences and training. The survey was delivered to consultant surgeons with a UK practice through social media, specialty surgical societies and through PITSTOP sites. Descriptive statistics were reported.

RESULTS

Of the 200 people who received a link to the questionnaire, 109 completed it (response rate 54.5%). Respondents treated a median of 15 patients per year, with 20% of these having recurrent disease. Estimates of recurrence were higher than reported in the literature and higher than in a survey 10 years ago. Nearly 50% of surgeons advocate nonsurgical treatment in some patients despite limited evidence. Two thirds practised interventions not favoured by guidelines, including excision and leave open and midline closure techniques. Invasive procedures tended to be favoured when minimally invasive procedures may be appropriate. Surgical training programmes were the key training setting for commonly offered procedures, with few other training opportunities reported. For some procedures, no formal training had been given.

CONCLUSION

This survey highlights issues with quality in pilonidal surgery in the UK, with persistence of potentially outdated techniques, no consistent treatment escalation plan, a suggestion of under- or overtreatment of disease and a high perception of failure. This may relate to the current system of training and lack of evidence-based guidance.

Patient preferences for pilonidal sinus treatments: a discrete choice experiment survey

BACKGROUND

A range of treatments are available for pilonidal sinus disease (PSD), each of which has a different risk/benefit profile. The aim of this study was to collect patient views on which interventions they would rather avoid and which outcomes they most value for PSD.

METHOD

We conducted an online survey using the discrete choice experiment (DCE) method. DCE task involved participants choosing the best treatment option when presented with a set of competing hypothetical treatment profiles. Participants with symptomatic PSD, referred for elective surgery were recruited from 33 NHS trusts between 2020 and 2022. Collected DCE data were analysed using regression analyses.

RESULTS

One hundred and eleven participants completed the survey. In the overall group, low risk of infection/persistence was the most important characteristic when making a treatment decision (attribute importance score of 70%), followed by treatments with shorter recovery time with an attribute importance score of 30%. The results demonstrated that patients are willing to accept trade-offs between treatment recovery time and risk of infection/persistence. Patients above 30 years old are willing to accept a higher chance of treatment failure in exchange for rapid treatment recovery (risk tolerance between 22.35 - 34.67 percentage points). Conversely, patients in the younger age groups, were risk averse, and were only willing to accept a small risk 1.51-2.15 in exchange for a treatment with faster recovery time. All patient groups appear to the reject the excision and leave open technique due to the need for protracted nursing care.

CONCLUSION

This study highlights the need for shared decision making when it comes to surgery for PSD.

Exploring patient acceptability of a short-stay care pathway in hospital post arthroplasty: A theory-informed qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Arthroplasty is an effective, yet costly, surgical procedure for end-stage osteoarthritis. Shorter stays in hospital are being piloted in Australia. In some countries, short stay is established practice, associated with improving perioperative care and enhanced recovery after surgery practices. Exploring the acceptability to patients of a short stay care pathway in hospital postarthroplasty is important for informing health policy, adoption and potential scalability of this model of care.

METHODS

Consecutive patients at one site, at least 3 months post total joint arthroplasty, were invited to participate in theory-informed semi-structured qualitative interviews. The Theoretical Framework of Acceptability (TFA) informed development of the interview guide. Interview data were analysed using the Framework Method.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were invited. Fifteen consented to be contacted and were interviewed. Short-stay post arthroplasty was highly acceptable to patients who had the supports necessary to recover safely at home. Key findings were as follows: flexibility of short-stay care pathway was essential and valued; prior beliefs and expectations informed acceptability; and the absence of out-of-pocket expenses had an incentivizing effect, but was not the primary reason for patients choosing this care pathway. Further themes analysed within the TFA constructs highlighted nuances of acceptability relating to this model of care.

CONCLUSIONS

A short stay in hospital post arthroplasty appeared to be acceptable to patients who had experienced this care pathway. Our thematic findings identified aspects of the short-stay care pathway that enhanced acceptability and some aspects that limited acceptability. These findings can inform refinement of the short-stay care pathway.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients/people with lived experience were not involved in the study design or conduct of this preliminary work; as this short-stay model of care was recently introduced, only a small group of patients was eligible to participate in this study. This study is the first step towards understanding the experiences of patients about a short-stay model of care post arthroplasty. The findings will help inform future patient and public involvement in expanding the programme.

The relationship between perceptions of shared decision-making and patient-reported outcomes in a cross-sectional cohort of haemorrhoidectomy patients

AIM

Shared decision-making between patients and clinicians is important to surgical practice and patients' perceptions of their healthcare experience. This study aims to measure associations between patients' perceptions of their shared decision-making (SDM) process and health-related quality of life among a cohort of patients choosing surgical management of an elective surgical procedure, haemorrhoidectomy.

METHODS

This study is a single-site study based in Vancouver, Canada. Consecutive patients of five colorectal surgeons registered for elective haemorrhoidectomy between September 2016 and June 2020 were eligible to participate. Participants completed the CollaboRATE instrument which measures patients' perceptions of their SDM after the surgical consultation, along with a number of other patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

The participation rate was 45.3%, with 157 patients scheduled for haemorrhoidectomy providing complete information. Unadjusted results found that participants having the most comorbidities reported better communication with their surgeon. The adjusted results show that socioeconomic status and depression were associated with lower CollaboRATE scores. There was no effect of sex, pain interference, anxiety or perceived health status on participants' CollaboRATE scores.

CONCLUSION

This study found evidence that participants with lower economic status or those reporting depressive symptoms had worse perceptions of their SDM process with their surgeon. These findings suggest that special attention should be paid to the surgical decision-making process for these patient populations.

Endoscopic Pilonidal Sinus Treatment: A Tertiary Care Academic Center Experience

Background: Pilonidal disease (PD) represents one of the most common proctological diseases in young adults. Although several approaches to treating PD have been described, there is still a lack of agreement on which is the best. The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of endoscopic pilonidal sinus treatment (EPSiT) at a tertiary care academic center. Methods: Between June 2017 and January 2021, a total of 32 patients [12 women (37.5%) and 20 men (62.5%)] with a mean age of 29.22 ± 12.98 years were treated with EPSiT. Pre- and post-operative symptoms were assessed with a score of 0-5. Success was defined as the absence of any subjective symptoms, as well as by complete post-operative wound healing. Results: Most of the patients had a midline external opening (17/32; 53.1%), with a mean number of external openings of 2.41 (1-4) ± 1.04. The median post-operative pain score was 0, and the mean follow-up period was 22 (4-42) ± 11.49 months. The time to wound healing was reduced in patients with one opening (28.14 ± 4.06 days) compared to patients with two or more openings (33.64 ± 7.3 days) (p = 0.067). The mean operative time was longer in patients who subsequently had a recurrence (41.75 ± 6.24 vs. 34.18 ± 6.24 min; p = 0.031). The overall success rate was 87.5% (28/32), and the mean time to recurrence was 3.25 (2-5) ± 1.26 months. Conclusions: EPSiT represents a viable option for the treatment of PD. More evidence and a longer follow-up period are needed to validate the results.