Objective To examine the effect of surgeon sex on postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing common surgical procedures.Design Population based, retrospective, matched cohort study from 2007 to ...2015.Setting Population based cohort of all patients treated in Ontario, Canada.Participants Patients undergoing one of 25 surgical procedures performed by a female surgeon were matched by patient age, patient sex, comorbidity, surgeon volume, surgeon age, and hospital to patients undergoing the same operation by a male surgeon.Interventions Sex of treating surgeon.Main outcome measure The primary outcome was a composite of death, readmission, and complications. We compared outcomes between groups using generalised estimating equations.Results 104 630 patients were treated by 3314 surgeons, 774 female and 2540 male. Before matching, patients treated by female doctors were more likely to be female and younger but had similar comorbidity, income, rurality, and year of surgery. After matching, the groups were comparable. Fewer patients treated by female surgeons died, were readmitted to hospital, or had complications within 30 days (5810 of 52 315, 11.1%, 95% confidence interval 10.9% to 11.4%) than those treated by male surgeons (6046 of 52 315, 11.6%, 11.3% to 11.8%; adjusted odds ratio 0.96, 0.92 to 0.99, P=0.02). Patients treated by female surgeons were less likely to die within 30 days (adjusted odds ratio 0.88; 0.79 to 0.99, P=0.04), but there was no significant difference in readmissions or complications. Stratified analyses by patient, physician, and hospital characteristics did not significant modify the effect of surgeon sex on outcome. A retrospective analysis showed no difference in outcomes by surgeon sex in patients who had emergency surgery, where patients do not usually choose their surgeon.Conclusions After accounting for patient, surgeon, and hospital characteristics, patients treated by female surgeons had a small but statistically significant decrease in 30 day mortality and similar surgical outcomes (length of stay, complications, and readmission), compared with those treated by male surgeons. These findings support the need for further examination of the surgical outcomes and mechanisms related to physicians and the underlying processes and patterns of care to improve mortality, complications, and readmissions for all patients.
Objectives To identify inequalities in cancer survival rates for patients with a history of severe psychiatric illness (SPI) compared to those with no history of mental illness and explore ...differences in the provision of recommended cancer treatment as a potential explanation. Design Population-based retrospective cohort study using linked cancer registry and administrative data at ICES. Setting The universal healthcare system in Ontario, Canada. Participants Colorectal cancer (CRC) patients diagnosed between April 1st, 2007 and December 31st, 2012. SPI history (schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorders, other psychotic disorders, bipolar disorders or major depressive disorders) was determined using hospitalization, emergency department, and psychiatrist visit data and categorized as 'no history of mental illness, 'outpatient SPI history', and 'inpatient SPI history'. Main outcome measures Cancer-specific survival, non-receipt of surgical resection, and non-receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation. Results 24,507 CRC patients were included; 482 (2.0%) had an outpatient SPI history and 258 (1.0%) had an inpatient SPI history. Individuals with an SPI history had significantly lower survival rates and were significantly less likely to receive guideline recommended treatment than CRC patients with no history of mental illness. The adjusted HR for cancer-specific death was 1.69 times higher for individuals with an inpatient SPI (95% CI 1.36-2.09) and 1.24 times higher for individuals with an outpatient SPI history (95% CI 1.04-1.48). Stage II and III CRC patients with an inpatient SPI history were 2.15 times less likely (95% CI 1.07-4.33) to receive potentially curative surgical resection and 2.07 times less likely (95% CI 1.72-2.50) to receive adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy. These findings were consistent across multiple sensitivity analyses. Conclusions Individuals with an SPI history experience inequalities in colorectal cancer care and survival within a universal healthcare system. Increasing advocacy and the availability of resources to support individuals with an SPI within the cancer system are warranted to reduce the potential for unnecessary harm.
Ensuring safe, timely, and effective surgery is critical for high-quality healthcare and is the goal of surgical quality monitoring systems. At the heart of these systems are health administrative ...databases which house patient clinico-demographic information, healthcare processes and outcomes. Through analysis of monitoring systems outputs, we can identify gaps within healthcare delivery, patient experience, and surgical outcomes. However, gaps in our healthcare can only be measured by the variables we collect.
Equity stratifiers are sociodemographic descriptors that can identify patient populations who experience differences in health and healthcare that may be considered unjust or unfair. They include age, education, gender, geographic location, income, Indigenous identity, racialized group, and sex at birth. These equity stratifiers represent measurable components of the social determinants of health housed within health administrative databases and allow for standardized analysis and reporting of health inequity. However, not all databases collect these stratifiers – making granular analysis of patient subgroups who may experience health inequity impossible to measure. Moreover, in databases that do collect this information, a wide range in the classification systems used makes for comparisons across jurisdictions challenging.
The focus of this narrative review will be to apply the principles of the equity stratifier framework to examine what measures are collected in surgical quality improvement databases, cancer monitoring systems and provincial/state health administrative databases in the United States of America and Canada. The goal of this narrative review is to 1) inform researchers, surgeons, and policymakers of the current landscape of social variables collected within common health administrative databases. 2) Outline the pros and cons of the current collection system. 3) Issue a call to action for policymakers to incorporate health equity frameworks into the collection and reporting of data.
•Equity stratifiers represent measurable components of the social determinants of health housed within health administrative databases.•Pro: In the US, nearly all equity stratifiers are measured within healthcare databases suggesting a robust collection system.•Con: Heterogeneity in the equity stratifiers used and lack of standardization precludes accurate comparisons of inequities across jurisdictions.•Pro: In Canada, comprehensive guidance on best practices in collection and reporting of equity stratifiers has emerged.•Con: Canada has lagged behind the US as databases do not routinely collect income, education, and race at the individual-level.
To examine the association between Textbook Outcome (TO)-a new composite quality measurement-and long-term survival in gastric cancer surgery.
Single-quality indicators do not sufficiently reflect ...the complex and multifaceted nature of perioperative care in patients with gastric adenocarcinoma.
All patients undergoing gastrectomy for nonmetastatic gastric adenocarcinoma registered in the Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumours of Ontario (PRESTO) between 2004 and 2015 were included. TO was defined according to negative margins; >15 lymph nodes sampled; no severe complications; no re-interventions; no unplanned ICU admission; length of stay ≤21 days; no 30-day readmission; and no 30-day mortality. Three-year survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. A marginal multivariable Cox proportional-hazards model was used to estimate the association between achieving TO metrics and long-term survival. E-value methodology was used to assess for risk of residual confounding.
Of the 1836 patients included in this study, 402 (22%) achieved all TO metrics. TO patients had a higher 3-year survival rate compared to non-TO patients (75% vs 55%, log-rank P < 0.001). After adjustments for covariates and clustering within hospitals, TO was associated with a 41% reduction in mortality (adjusted hazards ratio 0.59, 95% confidence interval 0.48, 0.72, P < 0.001). These results were robust to potential residual confounding.
Achieving TO is strongly associated with improved long-term survival in gastric cancer patients and merits further focus in surgical quality improvement efforts.
Intraoperative anesthesiology care is crucial to high-quality surgical care. The clinical expertise and experience of anesthesiologists may decrease the risk of adverse outcomes.
To examine the ...association between anesthesiologist volume and short-term postoperative outcomes for complex gastrointestinal (GI) cancer surgery.
This population-based cohort study used administrative health care data sets from various data sources in Ontario, Canada. Adult patients who underwent esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, or hepatectomy for GI cancer from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2018, were eligible. Patients with an invalid identification number, a duplicate surgery record, and missing primary anesthesiologist information were excluded.
Primary anesthesiologist volume was defined as the annual number of procedures of interest (esophagectomy, pancreatectomy, and hepatectomy) supported by that anesthesiologist in the 2 years before the index surgery. Volume was dichotomized into low-volume and high-volume categories, with 75th percentile or 6 or more procedures per year selected as the cutoff point.
The primary outcome was a composite of 90-day major morbidity (with a Clavien-Dindo classification grade 3-5) and readmission. Secondary outcomes were individual components of the primary outcome. The association between exposure and outcomes was examined using multivariable logistic regression models, accounting for potential confounders.
Of the 8096 patients included, 5369 were men (66.3%) and the median (interquartile range IQR) age was 65 (57-72) years. Operations were supported by 842 anesthesiologists and performed by 186 surgeons, and the median (IQR) anesthesiologist volume was 3 (1.5-6) procedures per year. A total of 2166 patients (26.7%) received care from high-volume anesthesiologists. Primary outcome occurred in 36.3% of patients in the high-volume group and 45.7% of patients in the low-volume group. After adjustment, care by high-volume anesthesiologists was independently associated with lower odds of the primary outcome (adjusted odds ratio aOR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94), major morbidity (aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.91), unplanned intensive care unit admission (aOR, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.76-0.94), but not readmission (aOR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.73-1.05) or mortality (aOR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.84-1.31). E-values analysis indicated that an unmeasured variable would unlikely substantively change the observed risk estimates.
This study found that, among adults who underwent complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery, those who received care from high-volume anesthesiologists had a lower risk of adverse postoperative outcomes compared with those who received care from low-volume anesthesiologists. These findings support organizing perioperative care to increase anesthesiologist volume to optimize patient outcomes.
Objective
To determine the association between gastric cancer surgery case-volume and Textbook Outcome, a new composite quality measurement.
Background
Textbook Outcome included (a) negative ...resection margin, (b) greater than 15 lymph nodes sampled, (c) no severe complication, (d) no re-intervention, (e) no unplanned ICU admission, (f) length of stay of 21 days or less, (g) no 30-day readmission and (h) no 30-day mortality following surgery.
Methods
All patients undergoing gastrectomy for non-metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma registered in the Population Registry of Esophageal and Stomach Tumours of Ontario between 2004 and 2015 were included. We used multivariable generalized estimating equation (GEE) logistic regression modelling to estimate the association between gastrectomy volume (surgeon and hospital annual volumes) and Textbook Outcome. Volumes were considered as continuous variables and quintiles.
Results
Textbook Outcome was achieved in 378 of 1660 patients (22.8%). The quality metrics least often achieved were inadequate lymph node sampling and presence of severe complications, which occurred in 46.1% and 31.7% of patients, respectively. Accounting for covariates and clustering, neither surgeon volume nor hospital volume were significantly associated with Textbook Outcome. However, hospital volume was associated with adequate lymphadenectomy and fewer unplanned ICU admissions.
Conclusions
Higher case volume can impact certain measures of quality of care but may not address all care structures necessary for ideal Textbook recovery. Future quality improvement strategies should consider using case-mix adjusted Textbook Outcome rates as a surgical quality metric.
•A D2 LND is preferred for curative intent resection with ≥16 LNs assessed for staging.•Gastric cancer surgery should aim to achieve an RO resection margin.•In the metastatic setting, surgery should ...only be considered for palliation of symptoms.•Patients should be referred to higher volume centres.•Laparoscopic resections should be performed to the same standards as open resections.
Gastric adenocarcinoma accounted for 6.8% of new cancer cases and 8.8% of cancer deaths worldwide in 2012. Although resection is the cornerstone for cure, several aspects of surgical intervention remain controversial or sub-optimally applied at the population level. These include staging, extent of lymph node dissection (LND), optimal requirements of LN assessment, minimum resection margins, surgical technique (laparoscopic vs. open), relationship between surgical volumes and patient outcomes, and resection of stage IV gastric cancer.
A systematic review was conducted to inform surgical care.
The evidence included in this systematic review consists of one guideline, seven systematic reviews and 48 primary studies.
All patients should be discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting and a staging CT of the chest and abdomen should always be performed. Diagnostic laparoscopy should be performed in patients at risk for stage IV disease. A D2 LND is preferred for curative-intent resection in advanced non-metastatic gastric cancer. At least 16 LNs should be assessed for adequate staging of curative-resected gastric cancer. Gastric cancer surgery should aim to achieve an RO resection margin. In the metastatic setting, surgery should only be considered for palliation of symptoms. Patients should be referred to higher volume centres, and those with adequate support to manage potential complications. Laparoscopic resections should be performed to the same standards as open resections.