Literature DB >> 29078904

Surgeon attitudes and practice patterns in managing small bowel obstruction: a qualitative analysis.

Lucas W Thornblade1, Anjali R Truitt2, Giana H Davidson2, David R Flum2, Danielle C Lavallee2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Historical training instructs surgeons to, "never let the sun set on a small bowel obstruction (SBO)" due to concern for bowel ischemia. However, the routine use of computed tomography scans for ruling out ischemia provides the opportunity for trial of nonoperative management, allowing time for resolution of adhesive SBO. In light of advances in practice, little is known about how surgeons manage these patients, in particular, whether there is consistency in the stated duration for safe nonoperative management.
METHODS: Using a case vignette (a patient with computed tomography scan diagnosed complete SBO without bowel ischemia), we interviewed a purposive sample of general surgeons practicing in Washington State to understand stated approaches to clinical management. Interview questions addressed typical practice, preferred timing of surgery, and approach. We conducted a content analysis to understand current practice and attitudes.
RESULTS: We interviewed 15 surgeons practicing across Washington State. Surgical practice patterns for patients with SBO varied widely. The period of time that surgeons were willing to manage patients nonoperatively ranged from 1-7 d. Interviews revealed insight into surgical decision-making, the importance of patient preferences, variation in practice, and evidence gaps. All surgeons acknowledged a lack of evidence to support appropriate management of patients with SBO.
CONCLUSIONS: Interviews with practicing surgeons highlight a changing paradigm away from routine early surgery for patients with adhesive SBO. However, there is lack of consensus in the appropriate duration of nonoperative management and practices vary considerably. These revealed attitudes inform the feasibility and design of future randomized studies of patients with adhesive SBO.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Clinical decision-making; Clinical practice patterns; Diagnostic imaging; Intestinal obstruction; Small bowel obstruction; Small intestine

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29078904      PMCID: PMC5679108          DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2017.06.052

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Surg Res        ISSN: 0022-4804            Impact factor:   2.192


  31 in total

1.  Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: Early Operative versus Observational Management.

Authors:  Joel Bauer; Brieze Keeley; Beth Krieger; Juan Deliz; Kojo Wallace; Danielle Kruse; Kai Dallas; Joseph Bornstein; David Chessin; Stephen Gorfine
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 0.688

2.  Mechanical small bowel obstruction: a plea for earlier surgical intervention.

Authors:  R H Playforth; J B Holloway; W O Griffen
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1970-05       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Intubate the bowel and enjoy the sunset.

Authors: 
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1985-11-16       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Mechanical intestinal obstruction.

Authors:  H Ellis
Journal:  Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)       Date:  1981-11-07

5.  Survey of opinions on operative management of adhesive small bowel obstruction: laparoscopy versus laparotomy in the state of Connecticut.

Authors:  Tolutope Oyasiji; Scott W Helton
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2011-02-27       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Implementation of a "real-world" learning health care system: Washington State's Comparative Effectiveness Research Translation Network (CERTAIN).

Authors:  David R Flum; Rafael Alfonso-Cristancho; Emily B Devine; Allison Devlin; Ellen Farrokhi; Peter Tarczy-Hornoch; Larry Kessler; Danielle Lavallee; Donald L Patrick; John L Gore; Sean D Sullivan
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 3.982

7.  Contribution of computed tomography to decision making in the management of adhesive small bowel obstruction.

Authors:  V Donckier; J Closset; D Van Gansbeke; M Zalcman; M Sy; J J Houben; J P Lambilliotte
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Management of patients diagnosed as acute intestinal obstruction secondary to adhesions.

Authors:  J Sosa; B Gardner
Journal:  Am Surg       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 0.688

9.  Operative versus conservative management of adhesional intestinal obstruction

Authors: 
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 6.939

Review 10.  Rethinking autonomy: decision making between patient and surgeon in advanced illnesses.

Authors:  Lauren M Wancata; Daniel B Hinshaw
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2016-02
View more
  8 in total

1.  Fluoroscopy-guided long intestinal tube placement for the treatment of malignant bowel obstruction.

Authors:  Haiyang Lai; Ketong Wu; Yang Liu; Zhaofei Zeng; Bo Zhang
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2019-03-15       Impact factor: 2.967

Review 2.  GI Surgical Emergencies: Scope and Burden of Disease.

Authors:  Matthew C Hernandez; Firas Madbak; Katherine Parikh; Marie Crandall
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2018-10-15       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  The Safety of Expectant Management for Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Lucas W Thornblade; Francys C Verdial; Matthew A Bartek; David R Flum; Giana H Davidson
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2019-02-20       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Impact of Operative Management on Recurrence of Adhesive Small Bowel Obstruction: A Longitudinal Analysis of a Statewide Database.

Authors:  Andrew J Medvecz; Bradley M Dennis; Li Wang; Christopher J Lindsell; Oscar D Guillamondegui
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2020-01-17       Impact factor: 6.113

5.  National prospective cohort study of the burden of acute small bowel obstruction.

Authors:  M J Lee; A E Sayers; T M Drake; P J Marriott; I D Anderson; S P Bach; M Bradburn; D Hind; A Verjee; N S Fearnhead
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2019-02-22

Review 6.  Surgical complications in colorectal cancer patients.

Authors:  Haleh Pak; Leila Haji Maghsoudi; Ali Soltanian; Farshid Gholami
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2020-05-11

7.  Treatment decision-making during outpatient clinic visit of patients with esophagogastric cancer. The perspectives of clinicians and patients, a mixed method, multiple case study.

Authors:  Josianne C H B M Luijten; Linda Brom; Pauline A J Vissers; Yes A J van de Wouw; Fabienne A R M Warmerdam; Joos Heisterkamp; Stella Mook; Jamal Oulad Hadj; Marc J van Det; Liesbeth Timmermans; Maarten C C M Hulshof; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Camiel Rosman; Peter D Siersema; Marjan J Westerman; Rob H A Verhoeven; Grard A P Nieuwenhuijzen
Journal:  Cancer Med       Date:  2022-02-15       Impact factor: 4.711

8.  Clinical variation in the organization of clinical pathways in esophagogastric cancer, a mixed method multiple case study.

Authors:  P A J Vissers; R H A Verhoeven; G A P Nieuwenhuijzen; M J Westerman; J C H B M Luijten; L Brom; M de Bièvre; J Buijsen; T Rozema; N Haj Mohammad; P van Duijvendijk; E A Kouwenhoven; W J Eshuis; C Rosman; P D Siersema; H W M van Laarhoven
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-04-20       Impact factor: 2.908

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.