Surgeon Attitudes and Beliefs Toward Abdominal Wall Hernia Repair in Female Patients of Childbearing Age

Application of Component Separation and Short-Term Outcomes in Ventral Hernia Repairs

INTRODUCTION

Component separation (CS) techniques have evolved in recent years. How surgeons apply the various CS techniques, anterior component separation (aCS) versus posterior component separation (pCS), by patient and hernia-specific factors remain unknown in the general population. Improving the quality of ventral hernia repair (VHR) on a large scale requires an understanding of current practice variations and how these variations ultimately affect patient care. In this study, we examine the application of CS techniques and the associated short-term outcomes while taking into consideration patient and hernia-specific factors.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed a clinically rich statewide hernia registry, the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative Hernia Registry, of persons older than 18 y who underwent VHR between January 2020 and July 2021. The exposure of interest was the use of CS. Our primary outcome was a composite end point of 30-d adverse events including any complication, emergency department visit, readmission, and reoperation. Our secondary outcome was surgical site infection (SSI). Multivariable logistic regression examined the association of CS use, 30-d adverse events, and SSI with patient-, hernia-, and operative-specific variables. We performed a sensitivity analysis evaluating for differences in application and outcomes of the posterior and aCS techniques.

RESULTS

A total of 1319 patients underwent VHR, with a median age (interquartile range) of 55 y (22), 641 (49%) female patients, and a median body mass index of 32 (9) kg/m². CS was used in 138 (11%) patients, of which 101 (73%) were pCS and 37 (27%) were aCS. Compared to patients without CS, patients undergoing a CS had larger median hernia widths (2.5 cm (range 0.01-23 cm) versus 8 cm (1-30 cm), P < 0.001). Of the CS cases, 49 (36%) performed in hernias less than 6 cm in size. Following multivariate regression, factors independently associated with the use of a CS were diabetes (odds ratio [OR]: 2.00, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.19-3.36), previous hernia repair (OR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.20-2.96), hernia width (OR: 1.28, 95% CI: 1.22-1.34), and an open approach (OR: 3.83, 95% CI: 2.24-6.53). Compared to patients not having a CS, use of a CS was associated with increased odds of 30-d adverse events (OR: 1.88 95% CI: 1.13-3.12) but was not associated with SSI (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 0.74-4.63). Regression analysis demonstrated no differences in 30-d adverse events or SSI between the pCS and aCS techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first population-level report of patients undergoing VHR with concurrent posterior or aCS. These data suggest wide variation in the application of CS in VHR and raises a concern for potential overutilization in smaller hernias. Continued analysis of CS application and the associated outcomes, specifically recurrence, is necessary and underway.

Evaluation of Treatment Differences Between Men and Women Undergoing Ventral Hernia Repair: An Analysis of the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative

BACKGROUND

Sex is emerging as an important clinical variable associated with surgical outcomes and decision making. However, its relevance in regard to baseline and treatment differences in primary and incisional ventral hernia repair remains unclear.

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective cohort study using the Abdominal Core Health Quality Collaborative database to identify elective umbilical, epigastric, or incisional hernia repairs. Propensity matching was performed to investigate confounder-adjusted treatment differences between men and women. Treatments of interest included surgical approach (minimally invasive or open), mesh use, mesh type, mesh position, anesthesia type, myofascial release, fascial closure, and fixation use.

RESULTS

A total of 8,489 umbilical, 1,801 epigastric, and 16,626 incisional hernia repairs were identified. Women undergoing primary ventral hernia repair were younger (umbilical 46.4 vs 54 years, epigastric 48.7 vs 52.7 years), with lower BMI (umbilical 30.4 vs 31.5, epigastric 29.2 vs 31.1), and less likely diabetic (umbilical 9.9% vs 11.4%, epigastric 6.8% vs 8.8%). Women undergoing incisional hernia repair were also younger (mean 57.5 vs 59.1 years), but with higher BMI (33.1 vs 31.5), and more likely diabetic (21.4% vs 19.1%). Propensity-matched analysis included 3,644 umbilical, 1,232 epigastric, and 12,480 incisional hernias. Women with incisional hernia were less likely to undergo an open repair (60.2% vs 63.4%, p < 0.001) and have mesh used (93.8% vs 94.8%, p = 0.02). In umbilical and incisional hernia repairs, women had higher rates of intraperitoneal mesh placement and men had higher rates of preperitoneal and retro-muscular mesh placement.

CONCLUSIONS

Small but statistically significant treatment differences in operative approach, mesh use, and mesh position exist between men and women undergoing ventral hernia repair. It remains unknown whether these treatment differences result in differing clinical outcomes.

Ventral hernia repair and mesh use in females of childbearing age

BACKGROUND

A substantial knowledge gap exists in understanding sex as a biological variable for abdominal wall hernia repair, which also extends to hernia repair practices in females of childbearing age. We sought to determine the incidence of mesh repairs in females of childbearing age and to characterize factors associated with mesh use.

METHODS

Using a statewide hernia-specific data registry, we conducted a retrospective study identifying females of childbearing age, defined as 18-44 per CDC guidelines, who underwent clean ventral hernia repair between January 2020 and Dec 2021. The primary outcome was mesh use. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine factors associated with mesh use. To further delineate whether childbearing status may affect decision to use mesh, we also examined mesh practice stratified by age, comparing women 18 to 44 to those 45 and older.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and thirty-six females of childbearing age underwent ventral hernia repair with a mean age of 34.8 (6.2) years. Mesh was used in 547 (65.4%) patients. Mesh use was significantly associated with minimally invasive approach [aOR 29.46 (95% CI 16.30-53.25)], greater hernia width [aOR 1.50 (95% CI 1.20-1.88)], and greater BMI [aOR 1.05 (95% CI 1.03-1.08)]. Age was not significantly associated with mesh use [aOR 1.02 (95% CI 0.99-1.05)]. Compared to 1,461 female patients older than 44 years old, there was no significant association between childbearing age and mesh use [aOR 0.77 (95% CI 0.57-1.04)].

CONCLUSIONS

Most females of childbearing age had mesh placed during ventral and incisional hernia repair, which was largely associated with hernia size, BMI, and a minimally invasive surgical approach. Neither chronologic patient age nor being of childbearing age were associated with mesh use. Insofar as existing evidence suggests that childbearing status is an important factor in deciding whether to use mesh, these findings suggest that real-world practice may not reflect that evidence.

Guideline-discordant care among females undergoing groin hernia repair: the importance of sex as a biologic variable

PURPOSE

Females suffer higher rates of operative recurrence and chronic pain following groin hernia repair. Guidelines recommend minimally invasive (MIS) groin hernia repair as the preferred approach to reduce these adverse outcomes. It is unknown what proportion of females receive MIS hernia repair. Therefore, our goal was to investigate adoption of evidence-based practices in groin hernia repair using sex as a biological variable.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of adults undergoing elective groin hernia repair (2014-2019) within a statewide quality improvement collaborative. Primary outcome was surgical approach. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to analyze the likelihood of undergoing MIS hernia repair. Secondary outcomes were 30-day adjusted rates of clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PROs included regret to undergo surgery among patients who completed post-operative surveys.

RESULTS

Among 23,723 patients, the majority (90.7%) were males. Compared to males, females less often underwent an MIS surgical approach (37.4% vs 45.1%, p < 0.0001). After adjustment for patient and clinical variables, females remained significantly less likely to undergo MIS groin hernia repair (aOR 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.97). Adjusted clinical outcomes were not different between males and females. Among 4325 patients who completed post-operative surveys, adjusted rates of regret to undergo surgery were higher among females (12.9% vs 8.5%, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Even after adjusting for differences, females were less likely to receive guideline-concordant groin hernia repair and were more likely to regret surgery. Understanding the behaviors of surgeons who treat females with groin hernia may inform quality metrics to promote best practices in this population.

Prevalence and risk factors of abdominal hernia among Saudi population

Objective:

Studies assessing prevalence and risk factors of abdominal hernia are scarce in Saudi Arabia, that is why this study aimed to find out the prevalence and risk factors of abdominal hernia among the Saudi Population in 2020.

Methods:

A cross-sectional study was done on 500 participants. A pre-designed questionnaire included three sections: Section A consisted of sociodemographic, Section B had items for three dimensions: pain at the site of the hernia or the hernia repair, restriction of activities, cosmetic discomfort; Section C included medical history and other associated risk factors of hernia.

Results:

The prevalence of abdominal hernia in our study was found to be 38.8%. The participants in 18-25 years had less prevalence (21.2%). participants with BMI >25 (Overweight and Obese) had higher prevalence than others. The mean EuraHS-QoL score in participants who had abdominal hernia was significantly higher than patients who didn't have AH. Age >40 years, male gender, BMI >25, congenital anomalies, history of abdominal surgery, history of abdominal trauma, family history, grand multipara, chronic cough, chronic bronchitis, and smoking were potential predictive factors of AH.

Conclusion:

Abdominal hernia is a common problem in Saudi Arabia. Abdominal hernias are more common in men than women, there is an obvious relationship between obesity, history of abdominal surgery, history of abdominal trauma, family history and hernias. Early diagnosis, easily accessible health facilities and health education are important to prevent complications and improve quality of life.

Development and Implementation of Preoperative Optimization for High-Risk Patients With Abdominal Wall Hernia

IMPORTANCE

Real-world surgical practice often lags behind the best scientific evidence. For example, although optimizing comorbidities such as smoking and morbid obesity before ventral and incisional hernia repair improves outcomes, as many as 25% of these patients have a high-risk characteristic at the time of surgery. Implementation strategies may effectively increase use of evidence-based practice.

OBJECTIVE

To describe current trends in preoperative optimization among patients undergoing ventral hernia repair, identify barriers to optimization, develop interventions to address these barriers, and then pilot these interventions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This quality improvement study used a retrospective medical record review to identify hospital-level trends in preoperative optimization among patients undergoing ventral and incisional hernia repair. Semistructured interviews with 21 practicing surgeons were conducted to elicit barriers to optimizing high-risk patients before surgery. Next, a task force of experts was convened to develop pragmatic interventions to increase surgeon use of preoperative optimization. Finally, these interventions were piloted at 2 sites to assess acceptability and feasibility. This study was performed from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was rate of referrals for preoperative patient optimization at the 2 pilot sites.

RESULTS

Among 23 000 patients undergoing ventral hernia repair, the mean (SD) age was 53.9 (14.3) years, and 12 315 (53.5%) were men. Of these, 8786 patients (38.2%) had at least 1 high-risk characteristic at the time of surgery, including 7683 with 1, 1079 with 2, and 24 with 3. At the hospital level, the mean proportion of patients with at least 1 of 3 high-risk characteristics at the time of surgery was 38.2% (95% CI, 38.1%-38.3%). This proportion varied widely from 21.5% (95% CI, 17.6%-25.5%) to 52.8% (95% CI, 43.9%-61.8%) across hospitals. Interviews with surgeons identified 3 major barriers to improving this practice: lost financial opportunity by not offering a patient an operation, lack of surgeon awareness of available resources for optimization, and organizational barriers. A task force therefore developed 3 interventions: a financial incentive to optimize high-risk patients, an educational intervention to make surgeons aware of available optimization resources, and on-site facilitation. These strategies were piloted at 2 sites where preoperative risk optimization referrals increased 860%.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study demonstrates a stepwise process of identifying a practice gap, eliciting barriers that contribute to this gap, using expert consensus and local resources to develop strategies to address these barriers, and piloting these strategies. This implementation strategy can be adopted to diverse settings given that it relies on developing and implementing strategies based on local practice patterns.

Development and Implementation of Preoperative Optimization for High-Risk Patients With Abdominal Wall Hernia

IMPORTANCE

Real-world surgical practice often lags behind the best scientific evidence. For example, although optimizing comorbidities such as smoking and morbid obesity before ventral and incisional hernia repair improves outcomes, as many as 25% of these patients have a high-risk characteristic at the time of surgery. Implementation strategies may effectively increase use of evidence-based practice.

OBJECTIVE

To describe current trends in preoperative optimization among patients undergoing ventral hernia repair, identify barriers to optimization, develop interventions to address these barriers, and then pilot these interventions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This quality improvement study used a retrospective medical record review to identify hospital-level trends in preoperative optimization among patients undergoing ventral and incisional hernia repair. Semistructured interviews with 21 practicing surgeons were conducted to elicit barriers to optimizing high-risk patients before surgery. Next, a task force of experts was convened to develop pragmatic interventions to increase surgeon use of preoperative optimization. Finally, these interventions were piloted at 2 sites to assess acceptability and feasibility. This study was performed from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The main outcome was rate of referrals for preoperative patient optimization at the 2 pilot sites.

RESULTS

Among 23 000 patients undergoing ventral hernia repair, the mean (SD) age was 53.9 (14.3) years, and 12 315 (53.5%) were men. Of these, 8786 patients (38.2%) had at least 1 high-risk characteristic at the time of surgery, including 7683 with 1, 1079 with 2, and 24 with 3. At the hospital level, the mean proportion of patients with at least 1 of 3 high-risk characteristics at the time of surgery was 38.2% (95% CI, 38.1%-38.3%). This proportion varied widely from 21.5% (95% CI, 17.6%-25.5%) to 52.8% (95% CI, 43.9%-61.8%) across hospitals. Interviews with surgeons identified 3 major barriers to improving this practice: lost financial opportunity by not offering a patient an operation, lack of surgeon awareness of available resources for optimization, and organizational barriers. A task force therefore developed 3 interventions: a financial incentive to optimize high-risk patients, an educational intervention to make surgeons aware of available optimization resources, and on-site facilitation. These strategies were piloted at 2 sites where preoperative risk optimization referrals increased 860%.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study demonstrates a stepwise process of identifying a practice gap, eliciting barriers that contribute to this gap, using expert consensus and local resources to develop strategies to address these barriers, and piloting these strategies. This implementation strategy can be adopted to diverse settings given that it relies on developing and implementing strategies based on local practice patterns.

Exploration of Factors Associated With Surgeon Deviation From Practice Guidelines for Management of Inguinal Hernias

IMPORTANCE

Despite availability of evidence-based guidelines for surgery, many patients receive guideline-discordant care. Reasons for this are largely unknown. For example, evidence-based guidelines recommend a minimally invasive approach for persons with bilateral or recurrent unilateral inguinal hernias. Benefits are also noted for primary unilateral inguinal hernia. However, findings from previous quantitative research indicate that only 26% of patients receive this treatment and only 42% of surgeons offer a minimally invasive approach, even for recurrent or bilateral hernias.

OBJECTIVE

To explore factors associated with surgeon choice of approach (minimally invasive vs open) in inguinal hernia repair as a tool to gain an understanding of guideline-discordant care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Qualitative study performed as part of a larger explanatory sequential mixed methods design. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 21 practicing surgeons from a large statewide quality collaborative who were diverse with regard to practice type, geographic location, and surgical specialty. Qualitative interviews consisted of a clinical vignette, followed by semi-structured interview questions. Through thematic analysis using qualitive data analysis software, patterns within the data were located, analyzed, and identified. All data were collected between April 24 and July 31, 2018.

EXPOSURE

Clinical vignette as part of the qualitative interviews.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Capture of surgical approaches and factors motivating decision-making for inguinal hernia repair.

RESULTS

Of the 21 participating surgeons, 17 (81%) were men, 18 (86%) were White, and all were 35 years of age or older. Data revealed 3 dominant themes: surgeon preference and autonomy (eg, favoring one approach over the other), access and resources (eg, availability of robot), and patient characteristics (eg, age, comorbidities).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Decision-making for the approach to inguinal hernia repair is largely influenced by surgeon preference and access to resources rather than patient factors. Although a one-size-fits-all approach is not recommended, the operative approach should ideally be informed by patient factors, including hernia characteristics. Addressing surgeon preference and available resources with a clinician-facing decision aid may provide an opportunity to optimize care for patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair.

Exploration of Surgeon Motivations in Management of Abdominal Wall Hernias: A Qualitative Study

IMPORTANCE

Although evidence-based guidelines designed to minimize health care variation and promote effective care are widely accepted, creating guidelines alone does not often lead to the desired practice change. Such knowledge-to-practice gaps are well-recognized in the management of patients with abdominal wall hernia, where wide variation in patient selection and operative approach likely contributes to suboptimal patient outcomes. To create sustainable, scalable, and widespread adherence to evidence-based guidelines, it is imperative to better understand individual surgeon motivations and behaviors associated with surgical decision-making.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the systematic application of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore motivations and behaviors associated with surgical decision-making in abdominal wall hernia practice to help inform the future design of theory-based interventions for desired practice and behavior change.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study used purposive sampling to recruit 21 practicing surgeons at community and academic hospitals from 5 health regions across Michigan. It used interviews consisting of clinical vignettes for highly controversial situations in abdominal wall hernia repair, followed by semistructured interview questions based on the domains of the TDF to gain nuance into motivating factors associated with surgical practice. Patterns within the data were located, analyzed, and identified through thematic analysis using software. All data were collected between May and July 2018, and data analysis was performed from August 2018 to July 2019.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Factors associated with decisions on the surgical approach to abdominal wall hernia repair were assessed using TDF.

RESULTS

Seventeen (81%) of the 21 participants were men, with a median (interquartile range) age of 47 (45-54) years. Of the 14 TDF domains, 5 were found to be most associated with decisions on the surgical approach to abdominal wall hernia repair for surgeons in Michigan: knowledge, beliefs about consequences, social or professional role and identity, environmental context and resources, and social influences. Mapping of the findings to the sources of behavior identified the potential intervention functions and policy categories that could be targeted for intervention. The intervention functions found to be most relevant included education, persuasion, modeling, incentivization, and environmental restructuring.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Using the TDF, this study found that the primary factors associated with individual practice were opinion leaders, practice conformity, and reputational concerns. These findings are important because they challenge traditional dogma, which relies mainly on dissemination of published evidence, education, and technical skills acquisition to achieve evidence-based practice. Such knowledge allows for the development of sustainable, theory-based interventions for adherence to evidence-based guidelines.