Cargando…

Surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: There is substantial variation in the practice of preoperative medical evaluation (PME) and limited evidence for its benefit, which raises concerns about overuse. Surgeons have a unique role in this multidisciplinary practice. The objective of this qualitative study was to explore surgeo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Riggs, Kevin R., Berger, Zackary D., Makary, Martin A., Bass, Eric B., Chander, Geetanjali
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5655808/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29090090
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-017-0072-5
_version_ 1783273606719995904
author Riggs, Kevin R.
Berger, Zackary D.
Makary, Martin A.
Bass, Eric B.
Chander, Geetanjali
author_facet Riggs, Kevin R.
Berger, Zackary D.
Makary, Martin A.
Bass, Eric B.
Chander, Geetanjali
author_sort Riggs, Kevin R.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: There is substantial variation in the practice of preoperative medical evaluation (PME) and limited evidence for its benefit, which raises concerns about overuse. Surgeons have a unique role in this multidisciplinary practice. The objective of this qualitative study was to explore surgeons’ practices and their beliefs about PME. METHODS: We conducted of semi-structured interviews with 18 surgeons in Baltimore, Maryland. Surgeons were purposively sampled to maximize diversity in terms of practice type (academic vs. private practice), surgical specialty, gender, and experience level. General topics included surgeons’ current PME practices, perceived benefits and harms of PME, the surgical risk assessment, and potential improvements and barriers to change. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using content analysis to identify themes, which are presented as assertions. Transcripts were re-analyzed to identify supporting and opposing instances of each assertion. RESULTS: A total of 15 themes emerged. There was wide variation in surgeons’ described PME practices. Surgeons believed that PME improves surgical outcomes, but not all patients benefit. Surgeons were cognizant of the financial cost of the current system and the potential inconvenience that additional tests and office visits pose to patients. Surgeons believed that PME has minimal to no risk and that a normal PME is reassuring to them and patients. Surgeons were confident in their ability to assess surgical risk, and risk assessment by non-surgeons rarely affected their surgical decision-making. Hospital and anesthesiology requirements were a major driver of surgeons’ PME practices. Surgeons did not receive much training on PME but perceived their practices to be similar to their colleagues. Surgeons believed that PME provides malpractice protection, welcomed standardization, and perceived there to be inadequate evidence to significantly change their current practice. CONCLUSIONS: Views of surgeons should be considered in future research on and reforms to the PME process.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5655808
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-56558082017-10-31 Surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study Riggs, Kevin R. Berger, Zackary D. Makary, Martin A. Bass, Eric B. Chander, Geetanjali Perioper Med (Lond) Research BACKGROUND: There is substantial variation in the practice of preoperative medical evaluation (PME) and limited evidence for its benefit, which raises concerns about overuse. Surgeons have a unique role in this multidisciplinary practice. The objective of this qualitative study was to explore surgeons’ practices and their beliefs about PME. METHODS: We conducted of semi-structured interviews with 18 surgeons in Baltimore, Maryland. Surgeons were purposively sampled to maximize diversity in terms of practice type (academic vs. private practice), surgical specialty, gender, and experience level. General topics included surgeons’ current PME practices, perceived benefits and harms of PME, the surgical risk assessment, and potential improvements and barriers to change. Interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. Transcripts were analyzed using content analysis to identify themes, which are presented as assertions. Transcripts were re-analyzed to identify supporting and opposing instances of each assertion. RESULTS: A total of 15 themes emerged. There was wide variation in surgeons’ described PME practices. Surgeons believed that PME improves surgical outcomes, but not all patients benefit. Surgeons were cognizant of the financial cost of the current system and the potential inconvenience that additional tests and office visits pose to patients. Surgeons believed that PME has minimal to no risk and that a normal PME is reassuring to them and patients. Surgeons were confident in their ability to assess surgical risk, and risk assessment by non-surgeons rarely affected their surgical decision-making. Hospital and anesthesiology requirements were a major driver of surgeons’ PME practices. Surgeons did not receive much training on PME but perceived their practices to be similar to their colleagues. Surgeons believed that PME provides malpractice protection, welcomed standardization, and perceived there to be inadequate evidence to significantly change their current practice. CONCLUSIONS: Views of surgeons should be considered in future research on and reforms to the PME process. BioMed Central 2017-10-24 /pmc/articles/PMC5655808/ /pubmed/29090090 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-017-0072-5 Text en © The Author(s). 2017 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Riggs, Kevin R.
Berger, Zackary D.
Makary, Martin A.
Bass, Eric B.
Chander, Geetanjali
Surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study
title Surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study
title_full Surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study
title_fullStr Surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study
title_full_unstemmed Surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study
title_short Surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study
title_sort surgeons’ views on preoperative medical evaluation: a qualitative study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5655808/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29090090
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-017-0072-5
work_keys_str_mv AT riggskevinr surgeonsviewsonpreoperativemedicalevaluationaqualitativestudy
AT bergerzackaryd surgeonsviewsonpreoperativemedicalevaluationaqualitativestudy
AT makarymartina surgeonsviewsonpreoperativemedicalevaluationaqualitativestudy
AT bassericb surgeonsviewsonpreoperativemedicalevaluationaqualitativestudy
AT chandergeetanjali surgeonsviewsonpreoperativemedicalevaluationaqualitativestudy