TY - JOUR
T1 - Synoptic operative reporting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy
T2 - A multi institutional pilot study evaluating completeness and surgeon perceptions
AU - Deal, Shanley B.
AU - D'Angelica, Michael I.
AU - Hawkins, William G.
AU - Pucci, Michael
AU - Ujiki, Michael
AU - Brunt, L. Michael
AU - Wexner, Steven
AU - Alseidi, Adnan A.
N1 - Funding Information:
This project was reviewed and met criteria as a quality improvement project not requiring human subjects review. A formal determination was provided by the Virginia Mason Medical Center Benaroya Research Institute Institutional Review Board. Synoptic operative report forms were modified and revised from those previously published with good reliability data for both pancreaticoduodenectomy 11 and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. 7 The institution that previously developed the pancreaticoduodenectomy SOR participated and assisted with the modifications to the SOR developed for this study design. We recruited six participating institutions for pancreaticoduodenectomy including: Virginia Mason Medical Center, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Methodist Dallas Medical Center, Carolinas Medical Center, Providence Portland and Washington University St. Louis. We recruited six participating institutions for laparoscopic cholecystectomy including: Virginia Mason Medical Center, Barnes Jewish Hospital, Washington University St. Louis, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Northshore University Health System, Guthrie Clinic and Winchester Hospital. Lead surgeons at each site served as content experts to review the two report forms and achieve consensus on form components via rounds of editing. Input and support was provided by the Americas Hepatopancreaticobiliary Association (AHPBA) for the PD SOR form and the Society of American Gastrointestinal and Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Safe Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Task Force for the LC SOR form. The electronic synoptic operative reports for pancreaticoduodenectomy ( Appendix 1 ) and laparoscopic cholecystectomy ( Appendix 2 ) are available for review. It is important to note that SOR ideally should be generated in a way that is interactive. Specifically, as selections are made from multiple choice or drop down menu options, the form automatically adds additional components that are relevant based on that selection. Both developed SOR had these capabilities improve ease of use so that components not applicable to the operation would not be seen by the user. In addition, to address case complexity and/or incorporate additions to the SOR, free text response options titled “brief narrative of the case” and “additional comments” are optional components of every SOR.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 Elsevier Inc.
PY - 2018/11
Y1 - 2018/11
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055801748&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.06.008
DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.06.008
M3 - Article
C2 - 29937324
AN - SCOPUS:85055801748
SN - 0002-9610
VL - 216
SP - 935
EP - 940
JO - American journal of surgery
JF - American journal of surgery
IS - 5
ER -