Dataset Information

Benchmarking rectal cancer care: institutional compliance with a longitudinal checklist.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:In 2012, the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons published the Rectal Cancer Surgery Checklist, a consensus document listing 25 essential elements of care for all patients undergoing radical surgery for rectal cancer. The authors herein examine checklist adherence in a mature, multisurgeon specialty academic practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS:A retrospective medical record review of patients undergoing elective radical resection for rectal adenocarcinoma over a 23-mo period was conducted. Checklists were completed post hoc for each patient, and these results were tabulated to determine levels of compliance. Subgroup analyses by compliance and experience levels of the treating surgeon were performed. RESULTS:A total of 161 patients underwent resection, demonstrating a median completion rate of 84% per patient. Poor compliance was noted consistently in documenting baseline sexual function (0%), multidisciplinary discussion of treatment plans (16.8%), pelvic nerve identification (8.7%) and leak testing (52.9%), and radial margin status reporting (57.5%). Junior surgeons achieved higher rates of compliance and were more likely to restage after neoadjuvant therapy (67.9% versus 29.4%, P < 0.001), discuss patients at tumor board (31.3% versus 13.2%, P = 0.014), and document leak testing (86.7% versus 47.2%, P = 0.005) compared with senior surgeons. CONCLUSIONS:Checklist compliance within a high-volume, specialty academic practice remains varied. Only surgeon experience level was significantly associated with high checklist compliance. Junior surgeons achieved greater compliance with certain items, particularly those that reinforce decision-making. Further efforts to standardize rectal cancer care should focus on checklist implementation, targeted surgeon outreach, and assessment of checklist compliance correlation to clinical outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Chapman WC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5881924 | biostudies-literature | 2018 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Benchmarking rectal cancer care: institutional compliance with a longitudinal checklist.

Chapman William C WC Choi Pamela P Hawkins Alexander T AT Hunt Steven R SR Silviera Matthew L ML Wise Paul E PE Mutch Matthew G MG Glasgow Sean C SC

The Journal of surgical research 20180221

<h4>Background</h4>In 2012, the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons published the Rectal Cancer Surgery Checklist, a consensus document listing 25 essential elements of care for all patients undergoing radical surgery for rectal cancer. The authors herein examine checklist adherence in a mature, multisurgeon specialty academic practice.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>A retrospective medical record review of patients undergoing elective radical resection for rectal adenocarcinoma over a 2 ...[more]

PMID: 29605024

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCharting is an essential component of professional nursing practice and is arguably a key element of patient safety in surgery: without proper, objective, and timely documentation, both benign and tragical errors can occur. From surgery on wrong patients to wrong limbs, to the omission of antibiotics administration, many harms can happen in the operating room. Documentation has thus served as a safeguard for patient safety, professional responsibility, and professional accountability. In this context, we were puzzled by the practices we observed with respect to charting compliance with the surgical safety checklist (SSC) during a study of surgical teams in a large, urban teaching hospital in Canada (pseudonym 'C&C').MethodsThis article leverages institutional ethnography and a subset of data from a larger study to describe and explain the social organisation of the system that monitored surgical safety compliance at C&C from the standpoint of operating room nurses. This data included fieldnotes from observations of 51 surgical cases, on-the-spot interviews with nurses, formal interviews with individuals who were involved in the design and implementation of the SSC, and open-ended questions from two rounds of survey of OR teams.FindingsWe found that the compliance form and not the SSC itself formed the basis for reporting. To meet hospital accuracy in charting goals and legislated compliance documentation reporting requirements nurses 'pre-charted' compliance with the surgical checklist. The adoption of this workaround technically violated nursing charting principles and put them in ethically untenable positions.ConclusionsDocumenting compliance of the SSC constituted a moral hazard, constrained nurses' autonomy and moral agency, and obscured poor checklist adherence. The findings highlight how local and extra local texts, technologies and relations create ethical issues, raise questions about the effectiveness of resulting data for decision-making and contribute to ongoing conversations about nursing workarounds.

Project description:Among patients with rectal cancer, 5-10% have a primary rectal cancer beyond the total mesorectal excision plane (PRC-bTME) and 10% recur locally following primary surgery (LRRC). In both cases, patients 'care remains challenging with a significant worldwide variation in practice regarding overall management and criteria for operative intervention. These variations in practice can be explained by structural and organizational differences, as well as cultural dissimilarities. However, surgical resection of PRC-bTME and LRRC provides the best chance of long-term survival after complete resection (R0). With regards to the organization of the healthcare system and the operative criteria for these patients, France and Australia seem to be highly different. A benchmarking-type analysis between French and Australian clinical practice, with regards to the care and management of PRC-bTME and LRRC, would allow understanding of patients' care and management structures as well as individual and collective mechanisms of operative decision-making in order to ensure equitable practice and improve survival for these patients.The current study is an international Benchmarking trial comparing two cohorts of 120 consecutive patients with non-metastatic PRC-bTME and LRRC. Patients with curative and palliative treatment intent are included. The study design has three main parts: (1) French and Australian cohorts including clinical, radiological and surgical data, quality of life (MOS SF36, FACT-C) and distress level (Distress thermometer) at the inclusion, 6 and 12 months; (2) experimental analyses consisting of a blinded inter-country reading of pelvic MRI to assess operatory decisions; (3) qualitative analyses based on MDT meeting observation, semi-structured interviews and focus groups of health professional attendees and conducted by a research psychologist in both countries using the same guides. The primary endpoint will be the clinical resection rate. Secondary end points will be concordance rate between French and Australian operative decisions based on the inter-country reading MRI, post-operative mortality and morbidity rates, oncological outcomes based on resection status and one-year overall and disease-free survival, patients' quality of life and distress level. Qualitative analysis will compare obstacles and facilitators of operative decision-making between both countries.Benchmarking can be defined as a comparison and learning process which will allow, in the context of PRC-bTME and LRRC, to understand and to share the whole process management of these patientsbetween Farnce and Australia.NCT02551471 . (date of registration: 09/14/2015).

Dataset Information

Benchmarking rectal cancer care: institutional compliance with a longitudinal checklist.

Publications

Benchmarking rectal cancer care: institutional compliance with a longitudinal checklist.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets