Show Me the Money, I'll Show You My Complications: Impacts of Incentivized Incident Self-Reporting Among Surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Trial and error have the propensity to generate knowledge. Near misses and adverse event reporting can improve patient care. Professional ridicule or litigation risks after an incident may lead to decreased reporting by physicians; however, the lack of incident reporting can negatively affect patient safety and halt scientific advancements. This study compares reporting patterns after distribution of financial incentives to surgeons for self-reporting quality incidents.

METHODS

Retrospective review of an internal incident reporting system, RL6, from September 2018 to September 2019 was performed. Incident reporting patterns after incentive distributions across professional classifications and surgical specialties were evaluated. Engagement surveys on incident reporting were completed by physicians. The primary outcomes were changes in reporting patterns and perceptions after distribution of incentives.

RESULTS

Two hundred and eighteen surgical patients were identified in the incidents reported. Financial incentives significantly increased incidents reported (35 to 183) by physicians (37.1% to 67.8%; P < 0.001) and physician assistants (2.9% to 18.6%; P < 0.001). Acute care surgery displayed the largest increase in incidents reported among surgical specialties (5.7% to 20.2%; P = 0.040). Surgeons exhibited an increase in reporting (60.0% to 94.5%; P < 0.001) compared with witnesses after incentivization (2.9% to 1.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Financial incentives were associated with increased incident reporting. After the establishment of incentives, physicians were more likely to report their incidents, which may dispel professional embarrassment and display incident ownership. Institutions must encourage reporting while supporting providers. Future quality-improvement studies targeting reporting should incorporate incentives aimed to engage and empower health-care providers.

Bone Substitute Materials and Minimally Invasive Surgery: A Convergence of Fracture Treatment for Compromised Bone

This article focuses on the understanding of the biochemistry and surgical application of bone substitute materials (BSMs) and particularly the newer calcium phosphate materials that can form a structural orthobiologic matrix within the metaphyseal components of the periarticular bone. Six characteristics of BSMs are detailed that can be used as a guide for the proper selection and application of the optimal BSM type for periarticular fracture repair. These 6 characteristics of BSMs are divided into 2 pillars. One pillar details the 3 biochemical features of BSMs and the other pillar details the 3 surgical application properties.

Minimally Invasive Surgical Mitral Valve Repair: State of the Art Review

Minimally invasive surgical mitral valve repair (MVRepair) has become routine for the treatment of mitral valve regurgitation, and indications have been expanded to include reoperations. Current European Society of Cardiology/European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery guidelines for the management of valvular heart disease recommended standards in terms of mitral valve disease differentiation, timing of intervention and surgical techniques to improve patient care. Numerous minimally invasive techniques to lessen the invasiveness have been described, such as the minimal-access J-sternotomy (ministernotomy), the parasternal incision, the port-access technique and the right minithoracotomy. Despite the development of catheter-based techniques, surgical repair remains the gold standard today for nearly all patients with degenerative valvular diseases and the majority of patients with other types of valvular diseases. Techniques include resection of the prolapsed segment, neo-chordae implantation and ring annuloplasty. In this review, the current indications for mitral valve surgery are summarised and state-of-the-art MVRepair techniques are highlighted.