Quality of inguinal hernia operative reports: room for improvement.

The operative report (OR) has traditionally been in the form of a narrative, which is dictated after the surgical procedure by either a surgeon or resident. Its role is multifaceted: it serves as both documentation of the procedure and as communication between health care providers in the perioperative and postoperative period. It is also essential for medicolegal purposes, quality assurance, research into practice patterns and patient outcomes, and for compensation in some jurisdictions. In recent years, ORs have been examined and shown to be lacking in quality, completeness, timeliness and consistency. While several studies1–5 have assessed the quality and completeness of ORs in the areas of surgical oncology, bariatric surgery, obstetrical/gynecological surgeries, Mohs micrographic surgery and orthopedic procedures, ORs for common general surgery procedures have not been examined in great detail. To our knowledge, the quality of narrative ORs for inguinal hernia repairs (IHRs) has not been studied to date even though IHRs are among the most commonly performed procedures by general surgeons. The purpose of this study was to examine the completeness of IHR narrative ORs in a large academic centre across 6 teaching hospitals.