Caroline A. Thompson

Robotic versus laparoscopic versus open surgery in morbidly obese endometrial cancer patients — A comparative analysis of total charges and complication rates

OBJECTIVE To compare the complications and charges of robotic vs. laparoscopic vs. open surgeries in morbidly obese patients treated for endometrial cancer. METHODS Data were obtained from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2011. Chi-squared, Wilcoxon rank sum two-sample tests, and multivariate analyses were used for statistical analyses. RESULTS Of 1087 morbidly obese (BMI ≥40kg/m(2)) endometrial cancer patients (median age: 59years, range: 22 to 89), 567 (52%) had open surgery (OS), 98 (9%) laparoscopic (LS), and 422 (39%) robotic surgery (RS). 23% of OS, 13% of LS, and 8% of RS patients experienced an intraoperative or postoperative complication including: blood transfusions, mechanical ventilation, urinary tract injury, gastrointestinal injury, wound debridement, infection, venous thromboembolism, and lymphedema (p<0.0001). RS and LS patients were less likely to receive blood transfusions compared to OS (5% and 6% vs. 14%, respectively; p<0.0001). The median lengths of hospitalization for OS, LS, and RS patients were 4, 1, and 1days, respectively (p<0.0001). Median total charges associated with OS, LS, and RS were

Leading Causes of Death among Asian American Subgroups (2003–2011)

39,281,

Patient and provider characteristics associated with colorectal, breast, and cervical cancer screening among Asian Americans.

40,997, and

Development and validation of an index to assess hospital quality management systems

45,030 (p=0.037), respectively. CONCLUSIONS In morbidly obese endometrial cancer patients, minimally invasive robotic or laparoscopic surgeries were associated with fewer complications and less days of hospitalization relative to open surgery. Compared to laparoscopic approach, robotic surgeries had comparable rates of complications but higher charges.

Competing risk bias to explain the inverse relationship between smoking and malignant melanoma.

Background Our current understanding of Asian American mortality patterns has been distorted by the historical aggregation of diverse Asian subgroups on death certificates, masking important differences in the leading causes of death across subgroups. In this analysis, we aim to fill an important knowledge gap in Asian American health by reporting leading causes of mortality by disaggregated Asian American subgroups. Methods and Findings We examined national mortality records for the six largest Asian subgroups (Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese) and non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) from 2003-2011, and ranked the leading causes of death. We calculated all-cause and cause-specific age-adjusted rates, temporal trends with annual percent changes, and rate ratios by race/ethnicity and sex. Rankings revealed that as an aggregated group, cancer was the leading cause of death for Asian Americans. When disaggregated, there was notable heterogeneity. Among women, cancer was the leading cause of death for every group except Asian Indians. In men, cancer was the leading cause of death among Chinese, Korean, and Vietnamese men, while heart disease was the leading cause of death among Asian Indians, Filipino and Japanese men. The proportion of death due to heart disease for Asian Indian males was nearly double that of cancer (31% vs. 18%). Temporal trends showed increased mortality of cancer and diabetes in Asian Indians and Vietnamese; increased stroke mortality in Asian Indians; increased suicide mortality in Koreans; and increased mortality from Alzheimer’s disease for all racial/ethnic groups from 2003-2011. All-cause rate ratios revealed that overall mortality is lower in Asian Americans compared to NHWs. Conclusions Our findings show heterogeneity in the leading causes of death among Asian American subgroups. Additional research should focus on culturally competent and cost-effective approaches to prevent and treat specific diseases among these growing diverse populations.

Evidence-based organization and patient safety strategies in European hospitals.

Background: Routinely recommended screening for breast, cervical, and colorectal cancers can significantly reduce mortality from these types of cancer, yet screening is underutilized among Asians. Surveys rely on self-report and often are underpowered for analysis by Asian ethnicities. Electronic health records (EHR) include validated (as opposed to recall-based) rates of cancer screening. In this article, we seek to better understand cancer screening patterns in a population of insured Asian Americans. Methods: We calculated rates of compliance with cervical, breast, and colorectal cancer screening among Asians from an EHR population and compared them with non-Hispanic whites. We performed multivariable modeling to evaluate potential predictors (at the provider- and patient-level) of screening completion among Asian patients. Results: Aggregation of Asian subgroups masked heterogeneity in screening rates. Asian Indians and native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders had the lowest rates of screening in our sample, well below that of non-Hispanic whites. In multivariable analyses, screening completion was negatively associated with patient–physician language discordance for mammography [OR, 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.71–0.92] and colorectal cancer screening (OR, 0.79; CI, 0.72–0.87) and positively associated with patient–provider gender concordance for mammography (OR, 1.16; CI, 1.00–1.34) and cervical cancer screening (OR, 1.66; CI, 1.51–1.82). In addition, patient enrollment in online health services increased mammography (OR, 1.32; CI, 1.20–1.46) and cervical cancer screening (OR, 1.31; CI, 1.24–1.37). Conclusions: Language- and gender-concordant primary care providers and culturally tailored online health resources may help improve preventive cancer screening in Asian patient populations. Impact: This study demonstrates how the use of EHR data can inform investigations of primary prevention practices within the healthcare delivery setting. See all the articles in this CEBP Focus section, “Cancer in Asian and Pacific Islander Populations.” Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev; 23(11); 2208–17. ©2014 AACR.

A checklist for patient safety rounds at the care pathway level.

Objective The aim of this study was to develop and validate an index to assess the implementation of quality management systems (QMSs) in European countries. Design Questionnaire development was facilitated through expert opinion, literature review and earlier empirical research. A cross-sectional online survey utilizing the questionnaire was undertaken between May 2011 and February 2012. We used psychometric methods to explore the factor structure, reliability and validity of the instrument. Setting and participants As part of the Deepening our Understanding of Quality improvement in Europe (DUQuE) project, we invited a random sample of 188 hospitals in 7 countries. The quality managers of these hospitals were the main respondents. Main Outcome Measure The extent of implementation of QMSs. Results Factor analysis yielded nine scales, which were combined to build the Quality Management Systems Index. Cronbachs reliability coefficients were satisfactory (ranging from 0.72 to 0.82) for eight scales and low for one scale (0.48). Corrected item-total correlations provided adequate evidence of factor homogeneity. Inter-scale correlations showed that every factor was related, but also distinct, and added to the index. Construct validity testing showed that the index was related to recent measures of quality. Participating hospitals attained a mean value of 19.7 (standard deviation of 4.7) on the index that theoretically ranged from 0 to 27. Conclusion Assessing QMSs across Europe has the potential to help policy-makers and other stakeholders to compare hospitals and focus on the most important areas for improvement.

Quality management and perceptions of teamwork and safety climate in European hospitals

The relationship between smoking and melanoma remains unclear. Among the different results is the paradoxical finding that smoking was shown to be inversely associated with the risk of malignant melanoma in some large cohort and case-control studies, even after control for suspected confounding variables. Smoking is a known risk factor for many non-communicable diseases, including coronary heart disease, stroke, as well as other malignancies; it has been shown to be positively associated with other types of skin cancer, and there remains no clear biologic explanation for a possible protective effect on malignant melanoma. In this paper, we propose a plausible mechanism of bias from smoking-related competing risks that may explain or contribute to the inverse association between smoking and melanoma as spurious. Using directed acyclic graphs for formalization and visualization of assumptions, and Monte Carlo simulation techniques, we demonstrate how published inverse associations might be compatible with selection bias resulting from uncontrolled or unmeasured common causes of competing outcomes of smoking-related diseases and malignant melanoma. We present results from various scenarios assuming a true null as well as a true positive association between smoking and malignant melanoma. Under a true null assumption, we find inverse associations due to the biasing mechanism to be compatible with published results in the literature, especially after the addition of unmeasured confounding variables. This study could be seen as offering a cautionary note in the interpretation of published smoking-melanoma findings.

Light at night and health: the perils of rotating shift work

Objective To explore how European hospitals have implemented patient safety strategies (PSS) and evidence-based organization of care pathway (EBOP) recommendations and examine the extent to which implementation varies between countries and hospitals. Design Mixed-method multilevel cross-sectional design in seven countries as part of the European Union-funded project ‘Deepening our Understanding of Quality improvement in Europe’ (DUQuE). Setting and participants Seventy-four acute care hospitals with 292 departments managing acute myocardial infarction (AMI), hip fracture, stroke, and obstetric deliveries. Main outcome measure Five multi-item composite measures—one generic measure for PSS and four pathway-specific measures for EBOP. Results Potassium chloride had only been removed from general medication stocks in 9.4–30.5% of different pathways wards and patients were adequately identified with wristband in 43.0–59.7%. Although 86.3% of areas treating AMI patients had immediate access to a specialist physician, only 56.0% had arrangements for patients to receive thrombolysis within 30 min of arrival at the hospital. A substantial amount of the total variance observed was due to between-hospital differences in the same country for PSS (65.9%). In EBOP, between-country differences play also an important role (10.1% in AMI to 57.1% in hip fracture). Conclusions There were substantial gaps between evidence and practice of PSS and EBOP in a sample of European hospitals and variations due to country differences are more important in EBOP than in PSS, but less important than within-country variations. Agencies supporting the implementation of PSS and EBOP should closely re-examine the effectiveness of their current strategies.

The use of on-site visits to assess compliance and implementation of quality management at hospital level.

Objective To define a checklist that can be used to assess the performance of a department and evaluate the implementation of quality management (QM) activities across departments or pathways in acute care hospitals. Design We developed and tested a checklist for the assessment of QM activities at department level in a cross-sectional study using on-site visits by trained external auditors. Setting and participants A sample of 292 hospital departments of 74 acute care hospitals across seven European countries. In every hospital, four departments for the conditions: acute myocardial infarction (AMI), stroke, hip fracture and deliveries participated. Main Outcome Measures Four measures of QM activities were evaluated at care pathway level focusing on specialized expertise and responsibility (SER), evidence-based organization of pathways (EBOP), patient safety strategies and clinical review (CR). Results Participating departments attained mean values on the various scales between 1.2 and 3.7. The theoretical range was 0–4. Three of the four QM measures are identical for the four conditions, whereas one scale (EBOP) has condition-specific items. Correlations showed that every factor was related, but also distinct, and added to the overall picture of QM at pathway level. Conclusion The newly developed checklist can be used across various types of departments and pathways in acute care hospitals like AMI, deliveries, stroke and hip fracture. The anticipated users of the checklist are internal (e.g. peers within the hospital and hospital executive board) and external auditors (e.g. healthcare inspectorate, professional or patient organizations).