BACKGROUND: Electronic synoptic operative reports (E-SORs) have replaced dictated reports at many institutions, but whether E-SORs adequately document the components and findings of an operation has received limited study. This study assessed the reliability and completeness of E-SORs for pancreatic surgery developed at our institution. STUDY DESIGN: An attending surgeon and surgical fellow prospectively and independently completed an E-SOR after each of 112 major pancreatic resections (78 proximal, 29 distal, and 5 central) over a 10-month period (September 2008 to June 2009). Reliability was assessed by calculating the interobserver agreement between attending physician and fellow reports. Completeness was assessed by comparing E-SORs to a case-matched (surgeon and procedure) historical control of dictated reports, using a 39-item checklist developed through an internal and external query of 13 high-volume pancreatic surgeons. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement between attending and fellow was moderate to very good for individual categorical E-SOR items (kappa = 0.65 to 1.00, p < 0.001 for all items). Compared with dictated reports, E-SORs had significantly higher completeness checklist scores (mean 88.8 +/- 5.4 vs 59.6 +/- 9.2 [maximum possible score, 100], p < 0.01) and were available in patients' electronic records in a significantly shorter interval of time (median 0.5 vs 5.8 days from case end, p < 0.01). The mean time taken to complete E-SORs was 4.0 +/- 1.6 minutes per case. CONCLUSIONS: E-SORs for pancreatic surgery are reliable, complete in data collected, and rapidly available, all of which support their clinical implementation. The inherent strengths of E-SORs offer real promise of a new standard for operative reporting and health communication. Copyright 2010 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
BACKGROUND: Electronic synoptic operative reports (E-SORs) have replaced dictated reports at many institutions, but whether E-SORs adequately document the components and findings of an operation has received limited study. This study assessed the reliability and completeness of E-SORs for pancreatic surgery developed at our institution. STUDY DESIGN: An attending surgeon and surgical fellow prospectively and independently completed an E-SOR after each of 112 major pancreatic resections (78 proximal, 29 distal, and 5 central) over a 10-month period (September 2008 to June 2009). Reliability was assessed by calculating the interobserver agreement between attending physician and fellow reports. Completeness was assessed by comparing E-SORs to a case-matched (surgeon and procedure) historical control of dictated reports, using a 39-item checklist developed through an internal and external query of 13 high-volume pancreatic surgeons. RESULTS: Interobserver agreement between attending and fellow was moderate to very good for individual categorical E-SOR items (kappa = 0.65 to 1.00, p < 0.001 for all items). Compared with dictated reports, E-SORs had significantly higher completeness checklist scores (mean 88.8 +/- 5.4 vs 59.6 +/- 9.2 [maximum possible score, 100], p < 0.01) and were available in patients' electronic records in a significantly shorter interval of time (median 0.5 vs 5.8 days from case end, p < 0.01). The mean time taken to complete E-SORs was 4.0 +/- 1.6 minutes per case. CONCLUSIONS: E-SORs for pancreatic surgery are reliable, complete in data collected, and rapidly available, all of which support their clinical implementation. The inherent strengths of E-SORs offer real promise of a new standard for operative reporting and health communication. Copyright 2010 American College of Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: Natalie Wiebe; Lucia Otero Varela; Daniel J Niven; Paul E Ronksley; Nicolas Iragorri; Hude Quan Journal: J Am Med Inform Assoc Date: 2019-11-01 Impact factor: 4.497
Authors: Shannon E Stogryn; Krista Hardy; Michael J Mullan; Jason Park; Christopher Andrew; Ashley Vergis Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-09-15 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Eran Sadot; Murray F Brennan; Ser Yee Lee; Peter J Allen; Mithat Gönen; Jeffery S Groeger; T Peter Kingham; Michael I D'Angelica; Ronald P DeMatteo; William R Jarnagin; Yuman Fong Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2014-07-22 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Grace W Ma; Amandeep Pooni; Shawn S Forbes; Cagla Eskicioglu; Emily Pearsall; Fred D Brenneman; Robin S McLeod Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 2.089