Deborah S. Keller M.D.

Keller, D. S., I. Tantchou, J. R. Flores-Gonzalez and D. P. Geisler (2017). “Predicting delayed discharge in a multimodal enhanced recovery pathway.” Am J Surg: 2017 Jun [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances with Enhanced Recovery Pathways(ERP), some patients have unexpected prolonged lengths of stay(LOS). Our goal was to identify the patient and procedural variables associated with delayed discharge despite an established ERP. METHODS: A divisional database was reviewed for minimally invasive colorectal resections with a multimodal ERP(8/1/13-7/31/15). Patients were stratified into ERP success or failure based on length of stay >/=5 days. Logistic regression modeling identified variables predictive of ERP failure. RESULTS: 274 patients were included- 229 successes and 45 failures. Groups were similar in demographics. Failures had higher rates of preoperative anxiety(p = 0.0352), chronic pain(p = 0.0040), prior abdominal surgery(p = 0.0313), and chemoradiation(p = 0.0301). Intraoperatively, failures had higher conversion rates(13.3% vs. 1.7%, p = 0.0002), transfusions(p = 0.0032), and longer operative times(219.8 vs. 183.5min,p = 0.0099). Total costs for failures were higher than successes($22,127 vs. $13,030,p = 0.0182). Variables independently associated with failure were anxiety(OR 2.28, p = 0.0389), chronic pain(OR 10.03, p = 0.0045), and intraoperative conversion(OR 8.02, p = 0.0043). CONCLUSIONS: Identifiable factors are associated with delayed discharge in colorectal surgery. By prospectively preparing for patient factors and changing practice to address procedural factors and ERP adherence, postoperative outcomes could be improved.

Keller, D. S., N. Parikh and A. J. Senagore (2017). “Predicting opportunities to increase utilization of laparoscopy for colon cancer.” Surg Endosc 31(4): 1855-1862.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: Despite proven safety and efficacy, rates of minimally invasive approaches for colon cancer remain low in the USA. Given the known benefits, investigating the root causes of underutilization and methods to increase laparoscopy is warranted. Our goal was to develop a predictive model of factors impacting use of laparoscopic surgery for colon cancer. METHODS: The Premier Hospital Database was reviewed for elective colorectal resections for colon cancer (2009-2014). Patients were identified by ICD-9-CM diagnosis code and then stratified into open or laparoscopic approaches by ICD-9-CM procedure codes. An adjusted multivariate logistic regression model identified variables predictive of use of laparoscopy for colon cancer. RESULTS: A total of 24,245 patients were included-12,523 (52 %) laparoscopic and 11,722 (48 %) open. General surgeons performed the majority of all procedures (77.99 % open, 71.60 % laparoscopic). Overall use of laparoscopy increased from 48.94 to 52.03 % over the study period (p < 0.0001). Patients with private insurance were more likely to have laparoscopy compared with Medicare patients (adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.089, 95 % CI [1.004, 1.181], p = 0.0388). Higher volume of surgeons (OR 3.518, 95 % CI [2.796, 4.428], p < 0.0001) and larger hospitals by bed size were more likely to approach colon cancer laparoscopically. Colorectal surgeons were 32 % more likely to approach a case laparoscopically than general surgeons (OR 1.315, 95 % CI [1.222, 1.415], p < 0.0001). Teaching hospitals, hospitals in the Midwest, and hospitals with less than 500 beds were less likely to use laparoscopy. CONCLUSIONS: There are patient, provider, and hospital characteristics that can be identified preoperatively to predict who will undergo surgery for colon cancer using laparoscopy. However, additional patients may be eligible for laparoscopy based on patient-level characteristics. These results have implications for regionalization and increasing teaching of MIS. Recognizing and addressing these variables with training and recruiting could increase use of minimally invasive approaches, with the associated clinical and financial benefits.

Keller, D. S., D. Kroll, H. T. Papaconstantinou and C. N. Ellis (2017). “Development and Validation of a Methodology to Reduce Mortality Using the Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program Risk Calculator.” J Am Coll Surg 224(4): 602-607.

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: To identify patients with a high risk of 30-day mortality after elective surgery, who may benefit from referral for tertiary care, an institution-specific process using the Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) Risk Calculator was developed. The goal was to develop and validate the methodology. Our hypothesis was that the process could optimize referrals and reduce mortality. STUDY DESIGN: A VASQIP risk score was calculated for all patients undergoing elective noncardiac surgery at a single Veterans Affairs (VA) facility. After statistical analysis, a VASQIP risk score of 3.3% predicted mortality was selected as the institutional threshold for referral to a tertiary care center. The model predicted that 16% of patients would require referral, and 30-day mortality would be reduced by 73% at the referring institution. The main outcomes measures were the actual vs predicted referrals and mortality rates at the referring and receiving facilities. RESULTS: The validation included 565 patients; 90 (16%) had VASQIP risk scores greater than 3.3% and were identified for referral; 60 consented. In these patients, there were 16 (27%) predicted mortalities, but only 4 actual deaths (p = 0.007) at the receiving institution. When referral was not indicated, the model predicted 4 mortalities (1%), but no actual deaths (p = 0.1241). CONCLUSIONS: These data validate this methodology to identify patients for referral to a higher level of care, reducing mortality at the referring institutions and significantly improving patient outcomes. This methodology can help guide decisions on referrals and optimize patient care. Further application and studies are warranted.

Keller, D. S., D. Kroll, H. T. Papaconstantinou and C. N. Ellis (2017). “Development and validation of a methodology to reduce mortality using the veterans administration surgical quality improvement program risk calculator.” J Am Coll Surg: 2017 Jan [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: To identify patients with a high risk of 30 day mortality after elective surgery that may benefit from referral for tertiary care, an institution-specific process using the Veterans Administration Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP) Risk Calculator was developed. The goal was to develop and validate the methodology. Our hypothesis was the process could optimize referrals and reduce mortality. STUDY DESIGN: A VASQIP risk score was calculated for all patients undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery at a single Veteran’s Administration (VA) facility. After statistical analysis, a VASQIP risk score of 3.3% predicted mortality was selected as the institutional threshold for referral to a tertiary-care center. The model predicted 16 percent of patients would require referral and 30 day mortality would be reduced by 73 percent at the referring institution. The main outcome measures were the actual versus predicted referrals and mortality rates at the referring and receiving facilities. RESULTS: The validation included 565 patients; 90 (16 percent) had VASQIP risk scores greater than 3.3 percent and were identified for referral; 60 consented. In these patients, there were 16 (27 percent) predicted mortalities, but only 4 actual deaths (p=0.007) at the receiving institution. Where referral was not indicated, the model predicted 4 mortalities (1%), but no actual deaths (p=0.1241). CONCLUSIONS: These data validate this methodology to identify patients for referral to a higher level of care, reducing mortality at the referring institutions and significantly improving patient outcomes. This methodology can help guide decisions on referrals and optimize patient care. Further application and studies are warranted.

Keller, D. S., C. P. Delaney, A. J. Senagore and L. S. Feldman (2016). “Uptake of enhanced recovery practices by sages members: A survey.” Surg Endosc: 2016 Dec [Epub ahead of print].

Full text of this article.

BACKGROUND: The SAGES Surgical Multimodal Accelerated Recovery Trajectory (SMART) Enhanced Recovery Task Force aims to increase awareness and provide tools for members to successfully implement enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) to improve clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction. An initial step was to survey SAGES member on their knowledge, use, and impediments to enhanced recovery. METHODS: An online survey designed by SMART committee members to define SAGES member’s awareness and use of enhanced recovery principles and practice was emailed to all SAGES members. Reminders were sent 2 and 3 weeks later, encouraging completion of the survey. The web-based survey included 48 questions and took an estimated 20 min to complete. RESULTS: A total of 229 members completed the survey. Respondents were primarily general/MIS surgeons (82.6%) working in an urban location (85.5%), with a bell-shaped age distribution (median 35-44). Almost half regularly used some elements of ERPs (48.7%), but 30% were unfamiliar with the concept. Wide variety in the specific ERP elements used and discharge criteria were reported. The majority had to create and implement their own plan (70.4%). Roadblocks to implementation were inconsistencies with partners/covering physicians (56.3%), nursing education (46.6%), and resources (34.7%). When implemented, members saw improvements in length of stay (88%), patient satisfaction (54.7%), postoperative pain (53.3%), time to return of bowel function (52.7%), and readmissions (16.7%). A need for education and standardization was especially seen in preoperative care, with 74.4% fasting patients from midnight the night before surgery. Wide variations were also reported in pain management practices. An overwhelming majority (89%) reported that having a protocol endorsed by a national organization, such as SAGES, would help with implementation. CONCLUSIONS: From this survey of SAGES members, there is a need for education, tools, and standardized protocols to increase awareness, support implementation, and encourage wider utilization of ERP. The overwhelming majority stated having a protocol endorsed by a national organization, such as SAGES, would facilitate implementation.