Motivations and Barriers Toward Implementation of a Rectal Cancer Synoptic Operative Report: A Process Evaluation.
Adult
Attitude of Health Personnel
Colorectal Surgery
/ methods
Communication Barriers
Digestive System Surgical Procedures
/ methods
Documentation
/ methods
Electronic Health Records
/ organization & administration
Female
Health Information Exchange
/ trends
Humans
Male
Motivation
Rectal Neoplasms
/ surgery
Research Design
/ standards
Surgeons
/ psychology
United States
Workflow
Journal
Diseases of the colon and rectum
ISSN: 1530-0358
Titre abrégé: Dis Colon Rectum
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372764
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 03 2022
01 03 2022
Historique:
pubmed:
30
10
2021
medline:
3
3
2022
entrez:
29
10
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The use of synoptic reporting has been shown to improve documentation of critical information and provide added value related to data access and extraction, data reliability, relevant detail, and completeness of information. Surgeon acceptance and adoption of synoptic reports has lagged behind other specialties. This study aimed to evaluate the process of implementing a synoptic operative report. This study was a mixed-methods process evaluation including surveys and qualitative interviews. This study focused on colorectal surgery practices across the United States. Twenty-eight board-certified colorectal surgeons were included. The synoptic operative report for rectal cancer was implemented. Acceptability, feasibility, and usability were measured by Likert-type survey questions and followed up with individual interviews to elicit experiences with implementation as well as motivations and barriers to use. Among all study participants, 28 surgeons completed the electronic survey (76% response rate) and 21 (57%) completed the telephone interview. Mean usability was 4.14 (range, 1-5; SE, 0.15), mean feasibility was 3.90 (SE, 0.15), and acceptability was 3.98 (SE, 0.18). Participants indicated that substantial administrative and technical support were necessary but not always available for implementation, and many were frustrated by the need to change their workflow. Most surgeon participants were male, white, had >12 years in practice, and used Epic electronic medical record systems. Therefore, they may not represent the perspectives of all US colon and rectal surgeons. In addition, as the synoptic operative report is implemented more broadly across the United States, it will be important to consider variations in the process by electronic medical record system. The synoptic operative report for rectal cancer was easy to implement and incorporate into workflow, in general, but surgeons remained concerned about additional burden without immediate and tangible value. Despite recognizing benefits, many participants indicated they only implemented the synoptic operative report because it was mandated by the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B735MOTIVACIONES Y BARRERAS HACIA LA IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE UN INFORME OPERATIVO SINÓPTICO DE CÁNCER RECTAL: UNA EVALUACIÓN DEL PROCESOANTECEDENTES:Se ha demostrado que el uso de informes sinópticos mejora la documentación de información crítica y proporciona un valor agregado relacionado con el acceso y extracción de datos, la confiabilidad de los datos, los detalles relevantes y la integridad de la información. La aceptación y adopción de informes sinópticos por parte de los cirujanos se ha quedado rezagada con respecto a otras especialidades.OBJETIVO:Evaluar el proceso de implementación de un informe operativo sinóptico.DISEÑO:Evaluación de procesos de métodos mixtos que incluyen encuestas y entrevistas cualitativas.AJUSTES:Prácticas de cirugía colorrectal en los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Veintiocho cirujanos colorrectales certificados por la junta.INTERVENCIONES:Implementación del informe operatorio sinóptico de cáncer de recto.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Aceptabilidad, viabilidad y usabilidad medidas por preguntas de encuestas tipo Likert y seguidas con entrevistas individuales para obtener experiencias con la implementación, así como motivaciones y barreras para el uso.RESULTADOS:Entre todos los participantes del estudio, 28 cirujanos completaron la encuesta electrónica (tasa de respuesta del 76%) y 21 (57%) completaron la entrevista telefónica. La usabilidad media fue 4,14 (rango = 1-5, error estándar (EE) = 0,15), la factibilidad media fue 3,90 (EE = 0,15) y la aceptabilidad fue 3,98 (EE = 0,18). Los participantes indicaron que se necesitaba un apoyo administrativo y técnico sustancial, pero que no siempre estaba disponible para la implementación y muchos se sintieron frustrados por la necesidad de cambiar su flujo de trabajo.LIMITACIONES:La mayoría de los cirujanos participantes eran hombres, blancos, tenían >12 años en la práctica y usaban sistemas de registros médicos electrónicos de Epic. Por lo tanto, es posible que no representen las perspectivas de todos los cirujanos de colon y recto de EE. UU. Además, a medida que el informe operativo sinóptico se implemente de manera más amplia en los EE. UU., Será importante considerar las variaciones en el proceso por sistema EMR.CONCLUSIONES:El informe quirúrgico sinóptico para el cáncer de recto fue en general fácil de implementar e incorporar en el flujo de trabajo, pero los cirujanos seguían preocupados por la carga adicional sin valor inmediato y tangible. A pesar de reconocer los beneficios, muchos participantes indicaron que solo implementaron el informe operativo sinóptico porque era un mandato del Programa Nacional de Acreditación para el Cáncer de Recto. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B735 (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
The use of synoptic reporting has been shown to improve documentation of critical information and provide added value related to data access and extraction, data reliability, relevant detail, and completeness of information. Surgeon acceptance and adoption of synoptic reports has lagged behind other specialties.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to evaluate the process of implementing a synoptic operative report.
DESIGN
This study was a mixed-methods process evaluation including surveys and qualitative interviews.
SETTINGS
This study focused on colorectal surgery practices across the United States.
PATIENTS
Twenty-eight board-certified colorectal surgeons were included.
INTERVENTIONS
The synoptic operative report for rectal cancer was implemented.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES
Acceptability, feasibility, and usability were measured by Likert-type survey questions and followed up with individual interviews to elicit experiences with implementation as well as motivations and barriers to use.
RESULTS
Among all study participants, 28 surgeons completed the electronic survey (76% response rate) and 21 (57%) completed the telephone interview. Mean usability was 4.14 (range, 1-5; SE, 0.15), mean feasibility was 3.90 (SE, 0.15), and acceptability was 3.98 (SE, 0.18). Participants indicated that substantial administrative and technical support were necessary but not always available for implementation, and many were frustrated by the need to change their workflow.
LIMITATIONS
Most surgeon participants were male, white, had >12 years in practice, and used Epic electronic medical record systems. Therefore, they may not represent the perspectives of all US colon and rectal surgeons. In addition, as the synoptic operative report is implemented more broadly across the United States, it will be important to consider variations in the process by electronic medical record system.
CONCLUSIONS
The synoptic operative report for rectal cancer was easy to implement and incorporate into workflow, in general, but surgeons remained concerned about additional burden without immediate and tangible value. Despite recognizing benefits, many participants indicated they only implemented the synoptic operative report because it was mandated by the National Accreditation Program for Rectal Cancer. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B735MOTIVACIONES Y BARRERAS HACIA LA IMPLEMENTACIÓN DE UN INFORME OPERATIVO SINÓPTICO DE CÁNCER RECTAL: UNA EVALUACIÓN DEL PROCESOANTECEDENTES:Se ha demostrado que el uso de informes sinópticos mejora la documentación de información crítica y proporciona un valor agregado relacionado con el acceso y extracción de datos, la confiabilidad de los datos, los detalles relevantes y la integridad de la información. La aceptación y adopción de informes sinópticos por parte de los cirujanos se ha quedado rezagada con respecto a otras especialidades.OBJETIVO:Evaluar el proceso de implementación de un informe operativo sinóptico.DISEÑO:Evaluación de procesos de métodos mixtos que incluyen encuestas y entrevistas cualitativas.AJUSTES:Prácticas de cirugía colorrectal en los Estados Unidos.PACIENTES:Veintiocho cirujanos colorrectales certificados por la junta.INTERVENCIONES:Implementación del informe operatorio sinóptico de cáncer de recto.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Aceptabilidad, viabilidad y usabilidad medidas por preguntas de encuestas tipo Likert y seguidas con entrevistas individuales para obtener experiencias con la implementación, así como motivaciones y barreras para el uso.RESULTADOS:Entre todos los participantes del estudio, 28 cirujanos completaron la encuesta electrónica (tasa de respuesta del 76%) y 21 (57%) completaron la entrevista telefónica. La usabilidad media fue 4,14 (rango = 1-5, error estándar (EE) = 0,15), la factibilidad media fue 3,90 (EE = 0,15) y la aceptabilidad fue 3,98 (EE = 0,18). Los participantes indicaron que se necesitaba un apoyo administrativo y técnico sustancial, pero que no siempre estaba disponible para la implementación y muchos se sintieron frustrados por la necesidad de cambiar su flujo de trabajo.LIMITACIONES:La mayoría de los cirujanos participantes eran hombres, blancos, tenían >12 años en la práctica y usaban sistemas de registros médicos electrónicos de Epic. Por lo tanto, es posible que no representen las perspectivas de todos los cirujanos de colon y recto de EE. UU. Además, a medida que el informe operativo sinóptico se implemente de manera más amplia en los EE. UU., Será importante considerar las variaciones en el proceso por sistema EMR.CONCLUSIONES:El informe quirúrgico sinóptico para el cáncer de recto fue en general fácil de implementar e incorporar en el flujo de trabajo, pero los cirujanos seguían preocupados por la carga adicional sin valor inmediato y tangible. A pesar de reconocer los beneficios, muchos participantes indicaron que solo implementaron el informe operativo sinóptico porque era un mandato del Programa Nacional de Acreditación para el Cáncer de Recto. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B735 (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).
Identifiants
pubmed: 34711713
doi: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000002202
pii: 00003453-202203000-00010
pmc: PMC8823905
doi:
Types de publication
Evaluation Study
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
353-360Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons.
Références
Bidwell SS, Merrell SB, Poles G, Morris AM; Synoptic Operative Report Study Group. Implementation of a synoptic operative report for rectal cancer: a mixed-methods study. Dis Colon Rectum. 2020;63:190–199.
Casati B, Bjugn R. Structured electronic template for histopathology reporting on colorectal carcinoma resections: five-year follow-up shows sustainable long-term quality improvement. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2012;136:652–656.
Harvey A, Zhang H, Nixon J, Brown CJ. Comparison of data extraction from standardized versus traditional narrative operative reports for database-related research and quality control. Surgery. 2007;141:708–714.
Gur I, Gur D, Recabaren JA. The computerized synoptic operative report: a novel tool in surgical residency education. Arch Surg. 2012;147:71–74.
Edhemovic I, Temple WJ, de Gara CJ, Stuart GC. The computer synoptic operative report–a leap forward in the science of surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:941–947.
Deal SB, D’Angelica MI, Hawkins WG, et al. Synoptic operative reporting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy and pancreaticoduodenectomy: a multi institutional pilot study evaluating completeness and surgeon perceptions. Am J Surg. 2018;216:935–940.
Phipps-Taylor M, Shortell SM. More than money: motivating physician behavior change in accountable care organizations. Milbank Q. 2016;94:832–861.
Urquhart R, Porter GA, Sargeant J, Jackson L, Grunfeld E. Multi-level factors influence the implementation and use of complex innovations in cancer care: a multiple case study of synoptic reporting. Implement Sci. 2014;9:121.
Chauhan BF, Jeyaraman MM, Mann AS, et al. Behavior change interventions and policies influencing primary healthcare professionals’ practice-an overview of reviews. Implement Sci. 2017;12:3.
Lubarsky DA, French MT, Gitlow HS, Rosen LF, Ullmann SG. Why money alone can’t (always) “nudge” physicians: the role of behavioral economics in the design of physician incentives. Anesthesiology. 2019;130:154–170.
Albanese M, Mejicano G, Xakellis G, Kokotailo P. Physician practice change I: a critical review and description of an Integrated Systems Model. Acad Med. 2009;84:1043–1055.
Wakefield JG. Commitment to change: exploring its role in changing physician behavior through continuing education. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2004;24:197–204.
Glasgow SC, Morris AM, Baxter NN, et al. Development of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons’ Rectal Cancer Surgery Checklist. Dis Colon Rectum. 2016;59:601–606.
Peters DH, Adam T, Alonge O, Agyepong IA, Tran N. Republished research: Implementation research: what it is and how to do it: implementation research is a growing but not well understood field of health research that can contribute to more effective public health and clinical policies and programmes. This article provides a broad definition of implementation research and outlines key principles for how to do it. Br J Sports Med. 2014;48:731–736.
Sluijter CE, van Lonkhuijzen LR, van Slooten HJ, Nagtegaal ID, Overbeek LI. The effects of implementing synoptic pathology reporting in cancer diagnosis: a systematic review. Virchows Arch. 2016;468:639–649.
Messenger DE, McLeod RS, Kirsch R. What impact has the introduction of a synoptic report for rectal cancer had on reporting outcomes for specialist gastrointestinal and nongastrointestinal pathologists? Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135:1471–1475.
Baranov NS, Nagtegaal ID, van Grieken NCT, et al. Synoptic reporting increases quality of upper gastrointestinal cancer pathology reports. Virchows Arch. 2019;475:255–259.
Orah NO, Anunobi CC, Ojewola RW. Synoptic versus narrative reporting of prostate biopsies at a tertiary healthcare institution: challenges, successes and expectations. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2017;17:e319–e323.
Srigley JR, McGowan T, Maclean A, et al. Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reporting: a population-based approach. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99:517–524.
Lankshear S, Srigley J, McGowan T, Yurcan M, Sawka C. Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reports – so what and who cares? A population-based satisfaction survey of 970 pathologists, surgeons, and oncologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2013;137:1599–1602.
Kennedy ED, Milot L, Fruitman M, et al. Development and implementation of a synoptic MRI report for preoperative staging of rectal cancer on a population-based level. Dis Colon Rectum. 2014;57:700–708.
Renshaw AA, Mena-Allauca M, Gould EW, Sirintrapun SJ. Synoptic reporting: evidence-based review and future directions. JCO Clin Cancer Inform. 2018;2:1–9.
Urquhart R, Jackson L, Sargeant J, Porter GA, Grunfeld E. Health system-level factors influence the implementation of complex innovations in cancer care. Healthc Policy. 2015;11:102–118.
Chu KM, Schoetz D. What impact might general surgery practice patterns of colon and rectal surgeons have on future training? Dis Colon Rectum. 2007;50:1250–1254.