Synoptic operative reporting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy: A multi institutional pilot study evaluating completeness and surgeon perceptions

Shanley B. Deal, Michael I. D'Angelica, William G. Hawkins, Michael Pucci, Michael Ujiki, L. Michael Brunt, Steven Wexner, Adnan A. Alseidi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

Background: Synoptic operative reports (SOR) are more accurate than dictated operative reports (DOR) in a few single institution experiences. We sought to examine the completeness of SOR for laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) in a multi institutional pilot study. Methods: Six institutions participated in SOR submission via a web-based survey. One institution collected DOR and case matched historical dictated operative reports (HOR) for subset analysis. A checklist evaluated completeness of all reports. A post-survey assessed participant opinions. Results: 40 PD SORs were 98.5% complete and 35 LC SORs were 99.7% complete. Single institution subset analysis respective percent complete were: 11 PD SORs 99%, DORs 70% and HORs 74% and 14 LC SORs 99.7%, DORs 76%, and HORs 75%. Post-survey results yielded 10 PD and 24 LC responses. An overwhelming majority agreed that SOR were easy to use and would prefer to use SOR compared to DOR. Conclusion: SOR are more complete than both study associated DOR and HOR. The majority of surgeons indicated their preference for SOR and their willingness to use them.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)935-940
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican journal of surgery
Volume216
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2018

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Synoptic operative reporting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy: A multi institutional pilot study evaluating completeness and surgeon perceptions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this