Literature DB >> 34523005

New Operative Reporting Standards: Where We Stand Now and Opportunities for Innovation.

Jacqueline M Soegaard Ballester1, Kristin E Goodsell2, Jae P Ermer1, Giorgos C Karakousis1,2, John T Miura1,2, Nicole M Saur1,2, Najjia N Mahmoud1,2, Ari Brooks1,2, Julia C Tchou1,2, Peter E Gabriel2,3,4, Lawrence N Shulman2,4, Heather Wachtel5,6.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer's (CoC) new operative standards for breast cancer, melanoma, and colon cancer surgeries will require that surgeons provide synoptic documentation of essential oncologic elements within operative reports. Prior to designing and implementing an electronic tool to support synoptic reporting, we evaluated current documentation practices at our institution to understand baseline concordance with these standards.
METHODS: Applicable procedures performed between 1 January 2018 and 31 December 2018 were included. Two independent reviewers evaluated sequential operative notes, up to a total of 100 notes, for documentation of required elements. Complete concordance (CC) was defined as explicit documentation of all required CoC elements. Mean percentage CC and surgeon-specific CC were calculated for each procedure. Interrater reliability was assessed via Cohen's kappa statistic.
RESULTS: For sentinel lymph node biopsy, mean CC was 66% (n = 100), with surgeon-specific CC ranging from 6 to 100%, and for axillary dissection, mean CC was 12% (n = 89) and surgeon-specific CC ranged from 0 to 47%. The single surgeon performing melanoma wide local excision had a mean CC of 98% (n = 100). For colon resections, mean CC was 69% (n = 96) and surgeon-specific CC ranged from 39 to 94%. Kappa scores were 0.77, 0.78, -0.15, and 0.78, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: We identified heterogeneity in current documentation practices. In our cohort, rates of baseline concordance varied across surgeons and procedures. Currently, documentation elements are interspersed within the operative report, posing challenges to chart abstraction with resulting imperfect interrater reliability. This presents an exciting opportunity to innovate and improve compliance by introducing an electronic synoptic documentation tool.
© 2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34523005     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-021-10766-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   5.344


  21 in total

1.  Electronic synoptic operative reporting: assessing the reliability and completeness of synoptic reports for pancreatic resection.

Authors:  Jason Park; Venu G Pillarisetty; Murray F Brennan; William R Jarnagin; Michael I D'Angelica; Ronald P Dematteo; Daniel G Coit; Maria Janakos; Peter J Allen
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2010-07-14       Impact factor: 6.113

2.  Comparison of data extraction from standardized versus traditional narrative operative reports for database-related research and quality control.

Authors:  A Harvey; H Zhang; J Nixon; C J Brown
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.982

3.  Adherence to surgical and oncologic standards improves survival in breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Beiqun Zhao; Catherine Tsai; Kelly K Hunt; Sarah L Blair
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-06-06       Impact factor: 3.454

4.  Advancement in the quality of operative documentation: A systematic review and meta-analysis of synoptic versus narrative operative reporting.

Authors:  Shannon Stogryn; Krista M Hardy; Ahmed M Abou-Setta; Kathleen M Clouston; Jennifer Metcalfe; Ashley S Vergis
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2019-05-14       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Compliance with Cancer Quality Measures Over Time and Their Association with Survival Outcomes: The Commission on Cancer's Experience with the Quality Measure Requiring at Least 12 Regional Lymph Nodes to be Removed and Analyzed with Colon Cancer Resections.

Authors:  Lawrence N Shulman; Amanda E Browner; Bryan E Palis; Katherine Mallin; Sumedh Kakade; Ned Carp; Ryan McCabe; David Winchester; Sandra L Wong; Daniel P McKellar
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-03-29       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Documentation of quality of care data for colon cancer surgery: comparison of synoptic and dictated operative reports.

Authors:  Reagan L Maniar; David J Hochman; Debrah A Wirtzfeld; Andrew M McKay; Clifford S Yaffe; Benson Yip; Richard Silverman; Jason Park
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2014-05-05       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Structured pathology reporting improves the macroscopic assessment of rectal tumour resection specimens.

Authors:  Simon King; Margaret Dimech; Susan Johnstone
Journal:  Pathology       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 5.306

8.  Implementation of a Synoptic Operative Report for Rectal Cancer: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Authors:  Serena S Bidwell; Sylvia Bereknyei Merrell; Gabriela Poles; Arden M Morris
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.585

9.  Completeness of operative reports for rectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Arielle E Kanters; Joceline V Vu; Ari D Schuman; Inga Van Wieren; Ashley Duby; Karin M Hardiman; Samantha K Hendren
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2019-09-28       Impact factor: 2.565

Review 10.  The effects of implementing synoptic pathology reporting in cancer diagnosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Caro E Sluijter; Luc R C W van Lonkhuijzen; Henk-Jan van Slooten; Iris D Nagtegaal; Lucy I H Overbeek
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2016-04-21       Impact factor: 4.064

View more
  2 in total

1.  It's time for a minimum synoptic operation template in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  Niall O'Connor; Michael Sugrue; Conor Melly; Gearoid McGeehan; Magda Bucholc; Aileen Crawford; Paul O'Connor; Fikri Abu-Zidan; Imtiaz Wani; Zsolt J Balogh; Vishal G Shelat; Giovanni D Tebala; Belinda De Simone; Hani O Eid; Mircea Chirica; Gustavo P Fraga; Salomone Di Saverio; Edoardo Picetti; Luigi Bonavina; Marco Ceresoli; Andreas Fette; Boris Sakakushe; Emmanouil Pikoulis; Raul Coimbra; Richard Ten Broek; Andreas Hecker; Ari Leppäniemi; Andrey Litvin; Philip Stahel; Edward Tan; Kaoru Koike; Fausto Catena; Michele Pisano; Federico Coccolini; Alison Johnston
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 5.469

2.  Satisfied or not satisfied? Electronic health records system implementation in Ghana: Health leaders' perspective.

Authors:  Priscilla Y A Attafuah; Patience Aseweh Abor; Aaron Asibi Abuosi; Edward Nketiah-Amponsah; Immaculate Sabelile Tenza
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 3.298

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.