Public reporting of individual physician patient experience scores is becoming widespread on hospital websites and may be included on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Physician Compare website in the future.1 2 Moreover, physician groups can submit patient experience scores for incentive compensation through the Merit-based Incentive Payment System, and many groups are including patient experience scores in the allocation of incentive compensation.3 However, there is concern that certain physician characteristics (eg, gender, age, training) may unduly influence these scores and may merit consideration of adjustment when used in these ways. It is important to understand whether uncontrollable factors beyond the patient–physician encounter may influence patients’ scores regarding a physician. It was our hypothesis that physician factors such as age, sex and aspects of his or her medical training significantly influence patient experience scores. Therefore, our objective was to assess the association between physician characteristics and patient experience scores from a diverse group of hospitals and medical groups.
Patient experience survey data were acquired for all physicians from a large, diverse, six-hospital (one academic medical centre, one large community hospital, four small community hospitals) health system consisting of 252 outpatient clinic locations for fiscal years (FY) 2013–2017. Only the outpatient survey (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, Clinican and Group (CG-CAHPS)) was examined as the inpatient survey (Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, Hospital (HCAHPS)) is not attributable to a single physician. Delivered nationally by a commercial third-party vendor, the survey contains 10 unique questions specifically addressing the …
Postoperative complications remain common after surgery, but little is known about the extent of variation in operative technical skill and whether variation is associated with patient outcomes.To examine the (1) variation in technical skill scores of practicing surgeons, (2) association between technical skills and patient outcomes, and (3) amount of variation in patient outcomes explained by a surgeon's technical skill.In this quality improvement study, 17 practicing surgeons submitted a video of a laparoscopic right hemicolectomy that was then rated by at least 10 blinded peer surgeons and 2 expert raters. The association between surgeon technical skill scores and risk-adjusted outcomes was examined using data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. The association between technical skill scores and outcomes was examined for colorectal procedures and noncolorectal procedures (ie, assessed on whether technical skills demonstrated during colectomy were associated with patient outcomes across other cases). In addition, the proportion of patient outcomes explained by technical skill scores was examined using robust regression techniques. The study was conducted from September 23, 2016, to February 10, 2018; data analysis was performed from November 2018 to January 2019.Colorectal and noncolorectal procedures.Any complication, mortality, unplanned hospital readmission, unplanned reoperation related to principal procedure, surgical site infection, and death or serious morbidity.Of the 17 surgeons included in the study, 13 were men (76%). The participants had a range from 1 to 28 years in surgical practice (median, 11 years). Based on 10 or more reviewers per video and with a maximum quality score of 5, overall technical skill scores ranged from 2.8 to 4.6. From 2014 to 2016, study participants performed a total of 3063 procedures (1120 colectomies). Higher technical skill scores were significantly associated with lower rates of any complication (15.5% vs 20.6%, P = .03; Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient r = -0.54, P = .03), unplanned reoperation (4.7% vs 7.2%, P = .02; r = -0.60, P = .01), and a composite measure of death or serious morbidity (15.9% vs 21.4%, P = .02; r = -0.60, P = .01) following colectomy. Similar associations were found between colectomy technical skill scores and patient outcomes for all types of procedures performed by a surgeon. Overall, technical skill scores appeared to account for 25.8% of the variation in postcolectomy complication rates and 27.5% of the variation when including noncolectomy complication rates.The findings of this study suggest that there is wide variation in technical skill among practicing surgeons, accounting for more than 25% of the variation in patient outcomes. Higher colectomy technical skill scores appear to be associated with lower complication rates for colectomy and for all other procedures performed by a surgeon. Efforts to improve surgeon technical skills may result in better patient outcomes.
Objectives: Our objective was to examine the implementation and associated clinical outcomes of a comprehensive surgical site infection (SSI) reduction bundle in a large statewide surgical quality improvement collaborative leveraging a multifaceted implementation strategy. Summary Background Data: Bundled perioperative interventions reduce colorectal SSI rates when enacted at individual hospitals, but the ability to implement comprehensive SSI bundles and to examine the resultant clinical effectiveness within a larger, diverse population of hospitals is unknown. Methods: A multifaceted SSI reduction bundle was developed and implemented in a large statewide surgical quality improvement collaborative through a novel implementation program consisting of guided implementation, data feedback, mentorship, process improvement training/coaching, and targeted-implementation toolkits. Bundle adherence and ACS NSQIP outcomes were examined preimplementation versus postimplementation. Results: Among 32 hospitals, there was a 2.5-fold relative increase in the proportion of patients completing at least 75% of bundle elements (preimplementation = 19.5% vs. postimplementation = 49.8%, P = 0.001). Largest adherence gains were seen in wound closure re-gowning/re-gloving (24.0% vs. 62.0%, P < 0.001), use of clean closing instruments (32.1% vs. 66.2%, P = 0.003), and preoperative chlorhexidine bathing (46.1% vs. 77.6%, P < 0.001). Multivariable analyses showed a trend toward lower risk of superficial incisional SSI in the postimplementation period compared to baseline (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.49–10.2, P = 0.06). As the adherence in the number of bundle elements increased, there was a significant decrease in superficial SSI rates (lowest adherence quintile, 4.6% vs. highest, 1.5%, P < 0.001). Conclusions: A comprehensive multifaceted SSI reduction bundle can be successfully implemented throughout a large quality improvement learning collaborative when coordinated quality improvement activities are leveraged, resulting in a 30% decline in SSI rates. Lower superficial SSI rates are associated with the number of adherent bundle elements a patient receives, rendering considerable benefits to institutions capable of implementing more components of the bundle.
Differences in medical school experiences may affect how prepared residents feel themselves to be as they enter general surgery residency and may contribute to resident burnout.
Objectives
To assess preparedness for surgical residency, to identify factors associated with preparedness, to examine the association between preparedness and burnout, and to explore resident and faculty perspectives on resident preparedness.
Design, Setting, and Participants
This cross-sectional study used convergent mixed-methods analysis of data from a survey of US general surgery residents delivered at the time of the 2017 American Board of Surgery In-Training Examination (January 26 to 31, 2017) in conjunction with qualitative interviews of residents and program directors conducted as part of the Flexibility in Duty Hour Requirements for Surgical Trainees (FIRST) trial. A total of 262 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education–approved US general surgery residency programs participated. Survey data were collected from 3693 postgraduate year (PGY) 1 and PGY2 surgical residents (response rate, 99%) and 98 interviews were conducted with residents and faculty from September 1 to December 15, 2018. Data were analyzed from June 1, 2017, to February 15, 2018.
Main Outcomes and Measures
Hierarchical regression models were developed to examine factors associated with preparedness and to assess the association between preparedness and resident burnout. Qualitative interviews were conducted to identify themes associated with preparation for residency.
Results
Of the 3693 PGY1 and PGY2 residents who participated (2258 male [61.1%]), 1775 (48.1%) reported feeling unprepared for residency. Approximately half of surgery residents took overnight call infrequently (≤2 per month) during their core medical student clerkship (1904 [51.6%]) or their subinternship (1600 [43.3%]); 524 (14.2%) took no call during their core clerkship. In multivariable analysis, residents were more likely to report feeling unprepared for residency if they were female (odds ratio [OR], 1.34; 95% CI, 1.15-1.57) or did not take call as a medical student (OR for 0 vs >4 calls, 2.72; 95% CI, 2.10-3.52). Residents who did not complete a subinternship were less likely to report feeling prepared for residency (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.96). Feeling adequately prepared for residency was associated with a nearly 2-fold lower risk of experiencing burnout symptoms (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.48-0.68). In interviews, the dominant themes associated with preparedness included the following: (1) various regulations limit the medical school experience, (2) overnight call facilitates preparation and selection of a specialty compatible with their preferences, and (3) adequate perceptions of residency improve expectations, resulting in improved preparedness, lower burnout rates, and lower risk of attrition.
Conclusions and Relevance
In this cross-sectional study, the perception of feeling unprepared was associated with inadequate exposure to resident responsibilities while in medical school. These findings suggest that effective preparation of medical students for residency may result in lower rates of subsequent burnout.
Objectives: The aims of this study were to: (1) measure the rate of failure to provide defect-free postoperative venous thromboembolism (VTE) chemoprophylaxis, (2) identify reasons for failure to provide defect-free VTE chemoprophylaxis, and (3) examine patient- and hospital-level factors associated with failure. Summary Background Data: Current VTE quality measures are inadequate. VTE outcome measures are invalidated for interhospital comparison by surveillance bias. VTE process measures (e.g., SCIP-VTE-2) do not comprehensively capture failures throughout patients’ entire hospitalization. Methods: We examined adherence to a novel VTE chemoprophylaxis process measure in patients who underwent colectomies over 18 months at 36 hospitals in a statewide surgical collaborative. This measure assessed comprehensive VTE chemoprophylaxis during each patient's entire hospitalization, including reasons why chemoprophylaxis was not given. Associations of patient and hospital characteristics with measure failure were examined. Results: The SCIP-VTE-2 hospital-level quality measure identified failures of VTE chemoprophylaxis in 0% to 3% of patients. Conversely, the novel measure unmasked failure to provide defect-free chemoprophylaxis in 18% (736/4086) of colectomies. Reasons for failure included medication not ordered (30.4%), patient refusal (30.3%), incorrect dosage/frequency (8.2%), and patient off-unit (3.4%). Patients were less likely to fail the chemoprophylaxis process measure if treated at nonsafety net hospitals (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.39–0.99, P = 0.045) or Magnet designated hospitals (OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.29–0.71, P = 0.001). Conclusions: In contrast to SCIP-VTE-2, our novel quality measure unmasked VTE chemoprophylaxis failures in 18% of colectomies. Most failures were due to patient refusals or ordering errors. Hospitals should focus improvement efforts on ensuring patients receive VTE prophylaxis throughout their entire hospitalization.
"QIM20-129: Are You Ready? Assessing Readiness to Implement Quality Improvement in Hospitals Participating in a Breast Cancer Collaborative" published on 20 Mar 2020 by National Comprehensive Cancer Network.
