Katherine A. Corso

Postgame analysis: Using video-based coaching for continuous professional development

BACKGROUND The surgical learning curve persists for years after training, yet existing continuing medical education activities targeting this are limited. We describe a pilot study of a scalable video-based intervention, providing individualized feedback on intraoperative performance. STUDY DESIGN Four complex operations performed by surgeons of varying experience--a chief resident accompanied by the operating senior surgeon, a surgeon with less than 10 years in practice, another with 20 to 30 years in practice, and a surgeon with more than 30 years of experience--were video recorded. Video playback formed the basis of 1-hour coaching sessions with a peer-judged surgical expert. These sessions were audio recorded, transcribed, and thematically coded. RESULTS The sessions focused on operative technique--both technical aspects and decision-making. With increasing seniority, more discussion was devoted to the optimization of teaching and facilitation of the residents technical performance. Coaching sessions with senior surgeons were peer-to-peer interactions, with each discussing his preferred approach. The coach alternated between directing the session (asking probing questions) and responding to specific questions brought by the surgeons, depending on learning style. At all experience levels, video review proved valuable in identifying episodes of failure to progress and troubleshooting alternative approaches. All agreed this tool is a powerful one. Inclusion of trainees seems most appropriate when coaching senior surgeons; it may restrict the dialogue of more junior attendings. CONCLUSIONS Video-based coaching is an educational modality that targets intraoperative judgment, technique, and teaching. Surgeons of all levels found it highly instructive. This may provide a practical, much needed approach for continuous professional development.

Protecting patients from an unsafe system: the etiology and recovery of intraoperative deviations in care.

Objective:To understand the etiology and resolution of unanticipated events in the operating room (OR). Background:The majority of surgical adverse events occur intraoperatively. The OR represents a complex, high-risk system. The influence of different human, team, and organizational/environmental factors on safety and performance is unknown. Methods:We video-recorded and transcribed 10 high-acuity operations, representing 43.7 hours of patient care. Deviations, defined as delays and/or episodes of decreased patient safety, were identified by majority consensus of a multidisciplinary team. Factors that contributed to each event and/or mitigated its impact were determined and attributed to the patient, providers, or environment/organization. Results:Thirty-three deviations (10 delays, 17 safety compromises, 6 both) occurred—with a mean of 1 every 79.4 minutes. These deviations were multifactorial (mean 3.1 factors). Problems with communication and organizational structure appeared repeatedly at the root of both types of deviations. Delays tended to be resolved with vigilance, communication, coordination, and cooperation, while mediation of safety compromises was most frequently accomplished with vigilance, leadership, communication, and/or coordination. The organization/environment was not found to play a direct role in compensation. Conclusions:Unanticipated events are common in the OR. Deviations result from poor organizational/environmental design and suboptimal team dynamics, with caregivers compensating to avoid patient harm. Although recognized in other high-risk domains, such human resilience has not yet been described in surgery and has major implications for the design of safety interventions.

The role of National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center status: observed variation in surgical care depends on the level of evidence.

Objective:We sought to evaluate differences in guideline concordance between National Cancer Institute (NCI)–designated and other centers and determine whether the level of available evidence influences the degree of variation in concordance. Background:The National Cancer Institute recognizes centers of excellence in the advancement of cancer care. These NCI-designated cancer centers have been shown to have better outcomes for cancer surgery; however, little work has compared surgical process measures. Methods:A retrospective cohort study was conducted using Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results registry linked to Medicare claims data. Fee-for-service Medicare patients with a definitive surgical resection for breast, colon, gastric, rectal, or thyroid cancers diagnosed between 2000 and 2005 were identified. Claims data from 1999 to 2006 were used. Our main outcome measure was guideline concordance at NCI-designated centers compared to other institutions, stratified by level of evidence as graded by National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline panels. Results:All centers achieved at least 90%, and often 95%, concordance with guidelines based on level 1 evidence. Concordance rates for guidelines with lower-level evidence ranged from 30% to 97% and were higher at NCI-designated centers. The adjusted concordance ratios for category 1 guidelines were between 1.02 and 1.08, whereas concordance ratios for guidelines with lower-level evidence ranged from 0.97 to 2.19, primarily favoring NCI-designated centers. Conclusions:When strong evidence supports a guideline, there is little variation in practice between NCI-designated centers and other hospitals, suggesting that all are providing appropriate care. Variation in care may exist, however, for guidelines that are based on expert consensus rather than strong evidence. This suggests that future efforts to generate needed evidence on the optimal approach to care may also reduce institutional variation.

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on breast reconstruction

With advances in oncologic treatment, cosmesis after mastectomy has assumed a pivotal role in patient and provider decision making. Multiple studies have confirmed the safety of both chemotherapy before breast surgery and immediate reconstruction. Little has been written about the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on decisions about reconstruction.

Deconstructing intraoperative communication failures.

BACKGROUND Communication failure is a common contributor to adverse events. We sought to characterize communication failures during complex operations. METHODS We video recorded and transcribed six complex operations, representing 22 h of patient care. For each communication event, we determined the participants and the content discussed. Failures were classified into four types: audience (key individuals missing), purpose (issue nonresolution), content (insufficient/inaccurate information), and/or occasion (futile timing). We added a systems category to reflect communication occurring at the organizational level. The impact of each identified failure was described. RESULTS We observed communication failures in every case (mean 29, median 28, range 13-48), at a rate of one every 8 min. Cross-disciplinary exchanges resulted in failure nearly twice as often as intradisciplinary ones. Discussions about or mandated by hospital policy (20%), personnel (18%), or other patient care (17%) were most error prone. Audience and purpose each accounted for >40% of failures. A substantial proportion (26%) reflected flawed systems for communication, particularly those for disseminating policy (29% of system failures), coordinating personnel (27%), and conveying the procedure planned (27%) or the equipment needed (24%). In 81% of failures, inefficiency (extraneous discussion and/or work) resulted. Resource waste (19%) and work-arounds (13%) also were frequently seen. CONCLUSIONS During complex operations, communication failures occur frequently and lead to inefficiency. Prevention may be achieved by improving synchronous, cross-disciplinary communication. The rate of failure during discussions about/mandated by policy highlights the need for carefully designed standardized interventions. System-level support for asynchronous perioperative communication may streamline operating room coordination and preparation efforts.

A Model of Knowledge Acquisition in Early Stage Breast Cancer Patients

Abstract:  To meaningfully participate in the decision‐making regarding a newly diagnosed breast cancer, a patient must acquire new knowledge. We describe a model of knowledge acquisition that can provide a framework for exploring the process and types of knowledge that breast cancer patients gain following their diagnosis. The four types of knowledge presented in this model—authoritative, technical, embodied, and traditional—are described and potential sources discussed. An understanding of knowledge acquisition in early stage breast cancer patients can provide healthcare practitioners with an important framework for optimizing decision‐making in this population.