A multicentre cohort study assessing day of week effect and outcome from emergency appendicectomy

Weekend effect in emergency laparotomy: a propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND

The 'weekend effect' is the term given to the observed discrepancy regarding patient care and outcomes on weekends compared to weekdays. This study aimed to determine whether the weekend effect exists within Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ) for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL), given recent advances in management of EL patients.

METHODS

A cohort study was conducted across five hospitals, comparing the outcomes of weekend and weekday acute EL. A propensity-score matched analysis was used to remove potential confounding patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the 487 patients included, 132 received EL over the weekend. There was no statistically significant difference between patients undergoing EL over the weekend compared to weekdays. Mortality rates were comparable between the weekday and weekend cohorts (P = 0.464).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that modern perioperative care practice in New Zealand obviates the 'weekend' effect.

Impact of the acute care surgery model on resident operative experience in emergency general surgery

Background:

The acute care surgery (ACS) model has been shown to improve patient, hospital and surgeon-specific outcomes. To date, however, little has been published on its impact on residency training. Our study compared the emergency general surgery (EGS) operative experiences of residents assigned to ACS versus elective surgical rotations.

Methods:

Resident-reported EGS case logs were prospectively collected over a 9-month period across 3 teaching hospitals. Descriptive statistics were tabulated and group comparisons were made using χ² statistics for categorical data and t tests for continuous data.

Results:

Overall, 1061 cases were reported. Resident participation exceeded 90%). Appendiceal and biliary disease accounted for 49.7% of EGS cases. Residents on ACS rotations reported participating in twice as many EGS cases per block as residents on elective rotations (12.64 v. 6.30 cases, p < 0.01). Most cases occurred after hours while residents were on call rather than during daytime ACS hours (78.8% v. 21.1%, p < 0.01). Senior residents were more likely than junior residents to report having a primary operator role (71.3% v. 32.0%, p < 0.01). Although the timing of cases made no difference in the operative role of senior residents, junior residents assumed the primary operator role more often during the daytime than after hours (50.0% v. 33.1%, p = 0.01).

Conclusion:

Despite implementation of the ACS model, residents in our program obtained most of their EGS operative experience after hours while on call. Although further research is needed, our study suggests that improved daytime access to the operating room may represent an opportunity to improve the quantity and quality of the EGS operative experience at our academic network.

Operative timing is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing emergency general surgery: a multisite study of emergency general services in a single academic network

Background

Despite the widespread implementation of the acute care surgery (ACS) model, limited access to operating room time represents a barrier to the optimal delivery of emergency general surgery (EGS) care. The objective of this study was to describe the effect of operative timing on outcomes in EGS in a network of teaching hospitals.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of EGS operations performed at 3 teaching hospitals in a single academic network. Time of operation was categorized as daytime (8 am to 5 pm), after hours (5 pm to 11 pm) or overnight (11 pm to 8 am). Time to operation was calculated as the interval from admission to operative start time and categorized as less than 24 hours, 24-72 hours and greater than 72 hours.

Results

After we excluded nonindex cases, trauma cases and cases occurring more than 5 days after admission, 1505 EGS cases were included. We found that 39.0% of operations were performed in the daytime, 46.3% after hours and 14.8% overnight. In terms of time to operation, 52.3% of operations were performed within 24 hours of admission, 33.4% in 24-72 hours and 14.3% in more than 72 hours. The overall complication rate was 20.6% (310 patients) and the overall mortality rate was 3.8% (57 patients). After multivariable analysis, time to operation more than 72 hours after admission was independently associated with increased odds of morbidity (odds ratio [OR] 1.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.09-2.47), while overnight operating was associated with increased odds of death (OR 3.15, 95% CI 1.29-7.70).

Conclusion

Increasing time from admission to operation and overnight operating were associated with greater morbidity and mortality, respectively, for EGS patients. Strategies to provide timely access to the operating room should be considered to optimize care in an ACS model.

Supportive technology in collaborative research: proposing the STiCR framework

INTRODUCTION

Achieving a standard of clinical research at the pinnacle of the evidence pyramid is historically expensive and logistically challenging. Research collaboratives have delivered high-impact prospective multicentre audits and clinical trials by using trainee networks with a range of enabling technology. This review outlines such use of technology in the UK and provides a framework of recommended technologies for future studies.

METHODS

A review of the literature identified technology used in collaborative projects. Additional technologies were identified through web searches. Technologies were grouped into themes including access (networking and engagement), collaboration and event organisation. The technologies available to support each theme were studied further to outline relative benefits and limitations.

FINDINGS

Thirty-three articles from trainee research collaboratives were identified. The most frequently documented technologies were social media applications, website platforms and research databases. The Supportive Technologies in Collaborative Research framework is proposed, providing a structure for using the technologies available to support multicentre collaboration. Such technologies are often overlooked in the literature by established and start-up collaborative project groups. If used correctly, they might help to overcome the physical, logistical and financial barriers of multicentre clinical trials.

The NeST (neoadjuvant systemic therapy in breast cancer) study - Protocol for a prospective multi-centre cohort study to assess the current utilization and short-term outcomes of neoadjuvant systemic therapies in breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) has several potential advantages in the treatment of breast cancer. However, there is currently considerable variation in NST use across the UK. The NeST study is a national, prospective, multicentre cohort study that will investigate current patterns of care with respect to NST in the UK.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Phase 1 - a national practice questionnaire (NPQ) to survey current practice.Phase 2 - a multi-centre prospective cohort study of breast cancer patients, undergoing NST.Women undergoing NST as their MDT recommended primary breast cancer treatment between December 2017 and May 2018 will be included. The breast surgery and oncological professional associations and the trainee research collaborative networks will encourage participation by all breast cancer centres.Patient demographics, radiological, oncological, surgical and pathological data will be collected, including complications and the need for further intervention/treatment. Data will be collated to establish current practice in the UK, regarding NST usage and variability of access and provision of these therapies. Prospective data on 600 patients from ~50 centres are anticipated.Trial registration: ISRCTN11160072.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Research ethics approval is not required for this study, as per the online Health Research Authority decision tool. The information obtained will provide valuable insights to help patients make informed decisions about their treatment. These data should establish current practice in the UK concerning NST, inform future service delivery as well as identifying further research questions.This protocol will be disseminated through the Mammary Fold Academic Research Collaborative (MFAC), the Reconstructive Surgery Trials Network and the Association of Breast Surgery. Participating units will have access to their own data and collective results will be presented at relevant conferences and published in appropriate peer-reviewed journals, as well as being made accessible to relevant patient groups.

Does the Day of the Week Predict a Cesarean Section? A Statewide Analysis

BACKGROUND

Although guidelines for clinical indications of cesarean sections (CS) exist, nonclinical factors may affect CS practices. We hypothesize that CS rates vary by day of the week.

METHODS

An analysis of the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database for California from 2006 to 2010 was performed. All patients admitted to a teaching or nonteaching hospital for attempted vaginal delivery were included. Patients who died within 24 h of admission were excluded. Weekend days were defined as Saturday and Sunday, and weekdays were defined as Monday to Friday. The primary outcome was CS versus vaginal delivery. Multivariable analysis was performed, adjusting for patient demographics, clinical factors, and system variables.

RESULTS

A total of 1,855,675 women were included. The overall CS rate was 9.02%. On unadjusted analysis, CS rates were significantly lower on weekends versus weekdays (6.65% versus 9.58%, P < 0.001). On adjusted analysis, women were 27% less likely to have a CS on weekends than on weekdays (odds ratio [OR] 0.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-0.75, P < 0.001). In addition, Hispanic ethnicity and delivery in teaching hospitals were associated with a decreased likelihood of CS (OR 0.91, 95% CI 0.86-0.96, P = 0.01; OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.93, P < 0.001, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

CS rates are significantly decreased on weekends relative to weekdays, even when controlling for patient, hospital, and system factors.

Day of Hospital Admission and Effect on Outcomes: The Weekend Effect in Acute Gallstone Pancreatitis

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study was to evaluate outcomes in patients who are admitted on weekend compared with those admitted on a weekday for acute gallstone pancreatitis.

METHODS

We performed a 3-y (2010-2012) analysis of the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database. Patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis who underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) were included and were divided into two groups: admission on the weekend versus the weekday. Primary outcome measures were time to ERCP, adverse events, and mortality. Secondary outcome measures were hospital length of stay and total cost.

RESULTS

A total of 5803 patients with acute gallstone pancreatitis who underwent ERCP were included in our study; of which 22.6% were admitted on the weekend, whereas 77.4% were admitted on a weekday. Mean age was 57 ± 18 y and 57.1% were female. Within 24 h, the rate of ERCP was higher in patients admitted on the weekday compared with those admitted on the weekend (40% versus 24%; P < 0.001). Similarly, by 48 h, the rate of ERCP was higher in the weekday group (69% versus 49%, P < 0.001). Patients admitted over the weekends had higher complications rate (P = 0.03), hospital length of stay (P < 0.001), and the total cost of hospitalization (P < 0.001) compared with the weekday group with no difference in in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients admitted on weekends for acute gallstone pancreatitis experience a delay in getting ERCP and have higher complications, prolonged hospital stay, and increased hospital costs compared with those admitted on weekdays.

Weekend vs. weekday appendectomy for complicated appendicitis, effects on outcomes and operative approach

PURPOSE

We hypothesized that laparoscopic (LA) or open appendectomy (OA) outcomes in complicated appendicitis are associated with weekend vs. weekday procedure date.

METHODS

We queried the Kids' Inpatient Database (1997-2012) for complicated (540.0, 540.1) appendicitis treated with LA or OA. Propensity score (PS)-matched analysis compared outcomes associated with weekend vs. weekday LA and OA.

RESULTS

Overall, 103,501 cases of complicated appendicitis were identified. On 1:1 PS-matched analyses of complicated appendicitis, weekday OA had increased wound infection rates (odds ratio: 1.3) vs. weekend OA, p < 0.001. Weekend OA had higher pneumonia rates (1.4) and longer length of stay, but lower home healthcare requirement following discharge vs. weekday OA, p < 0.05. Weekend and weekday LA had no significant outcome differences.

CONCLUSION

On a PS-matched comparison of appendectomies performed for complicated appendicitis on weekends and weekdays, procedure day is associated with different complication rates and resource utilization for OA. For LA, no weekend effect was noted for complicated appendicitis. To ensure the optimal patient care, prospective studies should be sought to identify causes of complications dependent on the day of procedure.

The BRASS (BReast Angiosarcoma Surveillance Study): Protocol for a retrospective multicentre cohort study to evaluate the management and outcomes of angiosarcoma of the breast and chest wall

•Multicentre retrospective study involving breast and plastic units across the UK.•Will produce valuable data regarding management and outcomes.•Will inform decision making and help shape a future definitive study.

The iBRA (implant breast reconstruction evaluation) study: protocol for a prospective multi-centre cohort study to inform the feasibility, design and conduct of a pragmatic randomised clinical trial comparing new techniques of implant-based breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure in the UK. The introduction of techniques to augment the subpectoral pocket has revolutionised the procedure, but there is a lack of high-quality outcome data to describe the safety or effectiveness of these techniques. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the best way of comparing treatments, but surgical RCTs are challenging. The iBRA (implant breast reconstruction evaluation) study aims to determine the feasibility, design and conduct of a pragmatic RCT to examine the effectiveness of approaches to IBBR.

METHODS/DESIGN

The iBRA study is a trainee-led research collaborative project with four phases:Phase 1 - a national practice questionnaire (NPQ) to survey current practicePhase 2 - a multi-centre prospective cohort study of patients undergoing IBBR to evaluate the clinical and patient-reported outcomesPhase 3- an IBBR-RCT acceptability survey and qualitative work to explore patients' and surgeons' views of proposed trial designs and candidate outcomes.Phase 4 - phases 1 to 3 will inform the design and conduct of the future RCT All centres offering IBBR will be encouraged to participate by the breast and plastic surgical professional associations (Association of Breast Surgery and British Association of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons). Data collected will inform the feasibility of undertaking an RCT by defining current practice and exploring issues surrounding recruitment, selection of comparator arms, choice of primary outcome, sample size, selection criteria, trial conduct, methods of data collection and feasibility of using the trainee collaborative model to recruit patients and collect data.

DISCUSSION

The preliminary work undertaken within the iBRA study will determine the feasibility, design and conduct of a definitive RCT in IBBR. It will work with the trainee collaborative to build capacity by creating an infrastructure of research-active breast and plastic surgeons which will facilitate future high-quality research that will ultimately improve outcomes for all women seeking reconstructive surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN37664281.

Feasibility work to inform the design of a randomized clinical trial of wound dressings in elective and unplanned abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND

Designing RCTs in surgery requires consideration of existing evidence, stakeholders' views and emerging interventions, to ensure that research questions are relevant to patients, surgeons and the health service. When there is uncertainty about RCT design, feasibility work is recommended. This study aimed to assess how feasibility work could inform the design of a future pilot study and RCT (Bluebelle, HTA - 12/200/04).

METHODS

This was a prospective survey of dressings used to cover abdominal wounds. Surgical trainees from 25 hospitals were invited to participate. Information on patient risk factors, operation type and type of wound dressings used was recorded for elective and unplanned abdominal procedures over a 2-week interval. The types of dressing used were summarized, and associations with operation type and patient risk factors explored.

RESULTS

Twenty hospitals participated, providing data from 727 patients (1794 wounds). Wounds were predominantly covered with basic dressings (1203 of 1769, 68·0 per cent) and tissue adhesive was used in 27·4 per cent (485 of 1769); dressing type was missing for 25 wounds. Just 3·6 per cent of wounds (63 of 1769) did not have a dressing applied at the end of the procedure. There was no evidence of an association between type of dressing used and patient risk factors, type of operation, or elective and unscheduled surgery.

CONCLUSION

Based on the findings from this large study of current practice, the pilot study design has evolved. The inclusion criteria have expanded to encompass patients undergoing unscheduled surgery, and tissue adhesive as a dressing will be evaluated as an additional intervention group. Collaborative methods are recommended to inform the design of RCTs in surgery, helping to ensure they are relevant to current practice.

Systematic review and critical appraisal of the impact of acellular dermal matrix use on the outcomes of implant-based breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) may improve outcomes in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). The aim of this study was critically to appraise and evaluate the current evidence for ADM-assisted IBBR.

METHODS

Comprehensive electronic searches identified complete papers published in English between January 2000 and August 2013, reporting any outcome of ADM-assisted IBBR. All systematic reviews, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and non-randomized studies (NRSs) with more than 20 ADM recipients were included. Studies were critically appraised using AMSTAR for systematic reviews, the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and its adaptation for NRSs. Characteristics and results of identified studies were summarized.

RESULTS

A total of 69 papers (8 systematic reviews, 1 RCT, 40 comparative studies and 20 case series) were identified, all of which were considered at high risk of bias, mostly due to patient selection and selective outcome reporting. The median ADM group sample size was 51.0 (i.q.r. 33.0-127.0). Most studies were single-centre (54), and they were often single-surgeon (16). ADM was most commonly used for immediate (40) two-stage IBBR (36) using human ADM (47), with few studies evaluating ADM-assisted single-stage procedures (10). All reported clinical outcomes (for example implant loss) and more than half of the papers (33) assessed process outcomes, but few evaluated cosmesis (16) or patient-reported outcomes (10). Heterogeneity between study design and, especially, outcome measurement precluded meaningful data synthesis.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence for the value of ADMs in IBBR is limited. Use in practice should therefore be considered experimental, and evaluation within registries or well designed and conducted studies, ideally RCTs, is recommended to prevent widespread adoption of a potentially inferior intervention.

The "weekend effect" in urgent general operative procedures

BACKGROUND

There is growing concern that the quality of inpatient care may differ on weekends versus weekdays. We assessed the "weekend effect" in common urgent general operative procedures.

METHODS

The Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Florida State Inpatient Database (2007-2010) was queried to identify inpatient stays with urgent or emergent admissions and surgery on the same day. Included were patients undergoing appendectomy, cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis, and hernia repair for obstructed/gangrenous hernia. Outcomes included duration of stay, inpatient mortality, hospital-adjusted charges, and postoperative complications. Controlling for hospital and patient characteristics and type of surgery, we used multilevel mixed-effects regression modeling to examine associations between patient outcomes and admissions day (weekend vs weekday).

RESULTS

A total of 80,861 same-day surgeries were identified, of which 19,078 (23.6%) occurred during the weekend. Patients operated on during the weekend had greater charges by $185 (P < .05), rates of wound complications (odds ratio [OR] 1.29, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.05-1.58; P < .05), and urinary tract infection (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.05-1.85; P < .05). Patients undergoing appendectomy had greater rates of transfusion (OR 1.43, 95% CI 1.09-1.87; P = .01), wound complications (OR 1.32, 95% CI 1.04-1.68; P < .05), urinary tract infection (OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.17-2.67; P < .01), and pneumonia (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.05-1.88; P < .05). Patients undergoing cholecystectomy had a greater duration of stay (P = .001) and greater charges (P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing weekend surgery for common, urgent general operations are at risk for increased postoperative complications, duration of stay, and hospital charges. Because the cause of the "weekend effect" is still unknown, future studies should focus on elucidating the characteristics that may overcome this disparity.