Mark G. Coleman

The National Training Programme for Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery in England: a new training paradigm

Aim  The National Training Programme in laparoscopic colorectal surgery was set up in 2008 to introduce laparoscopic colorectal surgery nationwide in a safe and structured way.

Is competency assessment at the specialist level achievable? A study for the national training programme in laparoscopic colorectal surgery in England.

Objectives: To develop, validate, and implement a competency assessment tool (CAT) for technical surgical performance in the context of a summative assessment process for the National Training Programme in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery (NTP). Background: The NTP is an educational initiative by the National Cancer Action Team in England to safely increase the uptake of laparoscopic colorectal surgery. It is the first competency-based national educational initiative for specialist surgeons (consultants), and performance assessment is an integral part of the program. Methods: Content validity was sought using expert opinion by semistructured interviews and the Delphi method. For validity and reliability studies, NTP apprentices and experts were asked to submit video-recorded cases. Construct validity was established between delegates who passed the assessment and those who failed. Concurrent validity was tested by comparing scores with error counts as identified by observational clinical human reliability analysis. A fully crossed design, using generalizability theory methods and D-studies, was used for reliability. Findings: Interviews and the Delphi method revealed a list of characteristics for assessment. A hybrid structure combining task-specific and generic items was used to include important characteristics into the assessment format. Fifty-four cases were submitted. Overall reliability reached G(ACI) = 0.803 when using 2 cases and 2 assessors. Experts scored significantly better than apprentices (3.19 vs 2.60; P = 0.004), and apprentices who passed had better scores than those who failed (2.95 vs 2.28; P < 0.001). There was an inverse correlation between CAT scores and observational clinical human reliability analysis error counts (&rgr; = −0.520, P < 0.001). The combination of both methods reached overall sensitivity of 100%, specificity of 83.3%, a positive predictive value of 93.8%, and a negative predictive value of 100%. Conclusions: The CAT can reliably assess technical performance in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. The use of CATs to judge specialist technical performance before embarking on independent practice of new procedures is achievable on a national scale and can be adapted by other specialties.

Core Outcomes for Colorectal Cancer Surgery: A Consensus Study.

Background Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a major cause of worldwide morbidity and mortality. Surgical treatment is common, and there is a great need to improve the delivery of such care. The gold standard for evaluating surgery is within well-designed randomized controlled trials (RCTs); however, the impact of RCTs is diminished by a lack of coordinated outcome measurement and reporting. A solution to these issues is to develop an agreed standard “core” set of outcomes to be measured in all trials to facilitate cross-study comparisons, meta-analysis, and minimize outcome reporting bias. This study defines a core outcome set for CRC surgery. Methods and Findings The scope of this COS includes clinical effectiveness trials of surgical interventions for colorectal cancer. Excluded were nonsurgical oncological interventions. Potential outcomes of importance to patients and professionals were identified through systematic literature reviews and patient interviews. All outcomes were transcribed verbatim and categorized into domains by two independent researchers. This informed a questionnaire survey that asked stakeholders (patients and professionals) from United Kingdom CRC centers to rate the importance of each domain. Respondents were resurveyed following group feedback (Delphi methods). Outcomes rated as less important were discarded after each survey round according to predefined criteria, and remaining outcomes were considered at three consensus meetings; two involving international professionals and a separate one with patients. A modified nominal group technique was used to gain the final consensus. Data sources identified 1,216 outcomes of CRC surgery that informed a 91 domain questionnaire. First round questionnaires were returned from 63 out of 81 (78%) centers, including 90 professionals, and 97 out of 267 (35%) patients. Second round response rates were high for all stakeholders (>80%). Analysis of responses lead to 45 and 23 outcome domains being retained after the first and second surveys, respectively. Consensus meetings generated agreement on a 12 domain COS. This constituted five perioperative outcome domains (including anastomotic leak), four quality of life outcome domains (including fecal urgency and incontinence), and three oncological outcome domains (including long-term survival). Conclusion This study used robust consensus methodology to develop a core outcome set for use in colorectal cancer surgical trials. It is now necessary to validate the use of this set in research practice.

Synthesis and summary of patient‐reported outcome measures to inform the development of a core outcome set in colorectal cancer surgery

Patient‐reported outcome (PRO) measures (PROMs) are standard measures in the assessment of colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment, but the range and complexity of available PROMs may be hindering the synthesis of evidence. This systematic review aimed to: (i) summarize PROMs in studies of CRC surgery and (ii) categorize PRO content to inform the future development of an agreed minimum ‘core’ outcome set to be measured in all trials.

Clinical validity of consultant technical skills assessment in the English National Training Programme for Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery

The English National Training Programme for Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery introduced a validated objective competency assessment tool to accredit surgeons before independent practice. The aim of this study was to determine whether this technical skills assessment predicted clinical outcomes.

Single port laparoscopic right colonic resection using a ‘vessel‐first’ approach

Aim  Single port laparoscopic colorectal surgery (SPLC), performed through a single incision of ≤ 3 cm, has been shown to be feasible. This study aimed to assess its safety and efficacy when used as the method of choice for right hemicolectomy.

A collaborative review of the current concepts and challenges of anastomotic leaks in colorectal surgery.

The reduction of the incidence, detection and treatment of anastomotic leakage (AL) continues to challenge the colorectal surgical community. AL is not consistently defined and reported in clinical studies, its occurrence is variably reported and its impact on longterm morbidity and health‐care resources has received relatively little attention. Controversy continues regarding the best strategies to reduce the risk. Diagnostic tests lack sensitivity and specificity, resulting in delayed diagnosis and increased morbidity. Intra‐operative fluorescence angiography has recently been introduced as a means of real‐time assessment of anastomotic perfusion and preliminary evidence suggests that it may reduce the rate of AL. In addition, concepts are emerging about the role of the rectal mucosal microbiome in AL and the possible role of new prophylactic therapies. In January 2016 a meeting of expert colorectal surgeons and pathologists was held in London, UK, to identify the ongoing controversies surrounding AL in colorectal surgery. The outcome of the meeting is presented in the form of research challenges that need to be addressed.

'Trainee' evaluation of the English National Training Programme for laparoscopic colorectal surgery

Aim  The aim of this study was to review trainees’ opinions of the training they had received through the National Training Programme (NTP).

Risk prediction score in laparoscopic colorectal surgery training: experience from the English National Training Program.

OBJECTIVE The overall aim was to develop and validate a risk prediction score for laparoscopic colorectal surgery training cases. BACKGROUND Published risk prediction scores are not transferable between hospitals because they are derived from a single institutions data and are not designed for use in training situations. METHODS Cases from the prospectively collected database of the National Training Programme in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery, between July 2008 and July 2012, were analyzed. Independent risk factors for conversion were identified by the logistic regression. Converting the odds ratios into integers created a risk prediction score for conversion. The clinical impact of this score was investigated by comparing postoperative complications and the level of trainer input in high- and low-risk cases. To study whether adverse outcomes in predicted high-risk cases occur outside the National Training Programme in Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery, 2 external data sets were examined. RESULTS A total of 2341 cases carried out in 42 hospitals were analyzed. Significant risk factors for conversion were body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiology classification, male sex, prior abdominal surgery, and resection type. At a risk score of more than 6, complication rates increased, including mortality (2.9% vs 0.5%, P < 0.001), anastomotic leak (4.3% vs 1.4%, P = 0.002), and a higher level of trainer input (32.2% vs 19.9% of cases, P < 0.001). Analysis of 786 external cases showed that high-risk cases had higher conversion (18.8% vs 7.1%, P < 0.001), overall complication (36.4% vs 15.0%, P < 0.001), and leak rates (4.0% vs 1.3%, P = 0.015). CONCLUSIONS A risk predication score to facilitate case selection in laparoscopic colorectal surgery training was developed and validated.

Development and evaluation of a cadaveric training curriculum for low rectal cancer surgery in the English LOREC National Development Programme.

The National Development Programme for Low Rectal Cancer in England (LOREC) was commissioned in response to wide variation in the outcome of patients with low rectal cancer. One of the aims of LOREC was to enhance surgical techniques in managing low rectal cancer. This study reports on the development and evaluation of a novel national technical skills cadaveric training curriculum in extralevator abdominoperineal excision.