User login
TORONTO – In academic medical centers, attending cardiothoracic surgeons often perform simultaneous procedures in different operating rooms as a means of increasing training opportunities for surgical fellows and to decrease hospital costs. However, the practice of running simultaneous operating rooms did not appear to affect perioperative timing or negatively affect patient outcomes, according to the results of a single institution review by Dr. Kenan W. Yount.
He and his colleagues at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, wanted to examine their own data in guiding hospital policy as several major centers have recently proposed implementing a 1:1 ratio of attending surgeon-to-operating room.
In his presentation, Dr. Yount discussed the results of their review study, which categorized 1,377 cardiac and 1,682 general thoracic operations performed from July 2011 to July 2013 by attending, case type, and whether the attending was simultaneously supervising two surgeries. "Our institution adheres to a strict policy of attending surgeon oversight of and involvement in the critical and key portions of all operations," said Dr. Yount.
They compared operative duration, starting and closing times, postoperative complications, and 30-day mortality in each category. They also compared rates postoperative complications, hospital length of stay, and operative mortality in each category.
Interestingly, timing effects varied between the two overall types of surgery. Running two rooms had no effect on room start times, but thoracic rooms finished 16 minutes later than scheduled. Across six surgeons and 15 operation types, however, there were no differences in operative times.
"Furthermore, running two rooms was not associated with any differences in operative duration, morbidity, or mortality in our multivariate regression analyses, and there were no statistically significant differences in observed outcomes in any category," Dr. Yount said.
"In academic cardiothoracic surgical centers that rely on surgical support from fellowship training, the practice of running simultaneous operating rooms can be efficient and does not appear to negatively impact patient outcomes," said Dr. Yount. "In addition, the practice did not significantly increase operative duration or dramatically [affect] operating room starting or closing times," he concluded.
In discussing the implications of these results, he said, "Obviously, there are caveats: Attendings must be intimately involved in operations and scrubbed for every key and critical portion of the operation; also operations being scheduled in separate rooms must be done so with reasonable foresight."
As long as institutions are following these practices, he concluded, "It would appear that lens of current policy efforts is too narrow by focusing on perception. The debate should be refocused by challenging training programs to strengthen attending involvement and ensure the requisite competence of their trainees."
Dr. Yount reported no relevant disclosures.
TORONTO – In academic medical centers, attending cardiothoracic surgeons often perform simultaneous procedures in different operating rooms as a means of increasing training opportunities for surgical fellows and to decrease hospital costs. However, the practice of running simultaneous operating rooms did not appear to affect perioperative timing or negatively affect patient outcomes, according to the results of a single institution review by Dr. Kenan W. Yount.
He and his colleagues at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, wanted to examine their own data in guiding hospital policy as several major centers have recently proposed implementing a 1:1 ratio of attending surgeon-to-operating room.
In his presentation, Dr. Yount discussed the results of their review study, which categorized 1,377 cardiac and 1,682 general thoracic operations performed from July 2011 to July 2013 by attending, case type, and whether the attending was simultaneously supervising two surgeries. "Our institution adheres to a strict policy of attending surgeon oversight of and involvement in the critical and key portions of all operations," said Dr. Yount.
They compared operative duration, starting and closing times, postoperative complications, and 30-day mortality in each category. They also compared rates postoperative complications, hospital length of stay, and operative mortality in each category.
Interestingly, timing effects varied between the two overall types of surgery. Running two rooms had no effect on room start times, but thoracic rooms finished 16 minutes later than scheduled. Across six surgeons and 15 operation types, however, there were no differences in operative times.
"Furthermore, running two rooms was not associated with any differences in operative duration, morbidity, or mortality in our multivariate regression analyses, and there were no statistically significant differences in observed outcomes in any category," Dr. Yount said.
"In academic cardiothoracic surgical centers that rely on surgical support from fellowship training, the practice of running simultaneous operating rooms can be efficient and does not appear to negatively impact patient outcomes," said Dr. Yount. "In addition, the practice did not significantly increase operative duration or dramatically [affect] operating room starting or closing times," he concluded.
In discussing the implications of these results, he said, "Obviously, there are caveats: Attendings must be intimately involved in operations and scrubbed for every key and critical portion of the operation; also operations being scheduled in separate rooms must be done so with reasonable foresight."
As long as institutions are following these practices, he concluded, "It would appear that lens of current policy efforts is too narrow by focusing on perception. The debate should be refocused by challenging training programs to strengthen attending involvement and ensure the requisite competence of their trainees."
Dr. Yount reported no relevant disclosures.
TORONTO – In academic medical centers, attending cardiothoracic surgeons often perform simultaneous procedures in different operating rooms as a means of increasing training opportunities for surgical fellows and to decrease hospital costs. However, the practice of running simultaneous operating rooms did not appear to affect perioperative timing or negatively affect patient outcomes, according to the results of a single institution review by Dr. Kenan W. Yount.
He and his colleagues at the University of Virginia, Charlottesville, wanted to examine their own data in guiding hospital policy as several major centers have recently proposed implementing a 1:1 ratio of attending surgeon-to-operating room.
In his presentation, Dr. Yount discussed the results of their review study, which categorized 1,377 cardiac and 1,682 general thoracic operations performed from July 2011 to July 2013 by attending, case type, and whether the attending was simultaneously supervising two surgeries. "Our institution adheres to a strict policy of attending surgeon oversight of and involvement in the critical and key portions of all operations," said Dr. Yount.
They compared operative duration, starting and closing times, postoperative complications, and 30-day mortality in each category. They also compared rates postoperative complications, hospital length of stay, and operative mortality in each category.
Interestingly, timing effects varied between the two overall types of surgery. Running two rooms had no effect on room start times, but thoracic rooms finished 16 minutes later than scheduled. Across six surgeons and 15 operation types, however, there were no differences in operative times.
"Furthermore, running two rooms was not associated with any differences in operative duration, morbidity, or mortality in our multivariate regression analyses, and there were no statistically significant differences in observed outcomes in any category," Dr. Yount said.
"In academic cardiothoracic surgical centers that rely on surgical support from fellowship training, the practice of running simultaneous operating rooms can be efficient and does not appear to negatively impact patient outcomes," said Dr. Yount. "In addition, the practice did not significantly increase operative duration or dramatically [affect] operating room starting or closing times," he concluded.
In discussing the implications of these results, he said, "Obviously, there are caveats: Attendings must be intimately involved in operations and scrubbed for every key and critical portion of the operation; also operations being scheduled in separate rooms must be done so with reasonable foresight."
As long as institutions are following these practices, he concluded, "It would appear that lens of current policy efforts is too narrow by focusing on perception. The debate should be refocused by challenging training programs to strengthen attending involvement and ensure the requisite competence of their trainees."
Dr. Yount reported no relevant disclosures.
Major finding: Running two rooms was not associated with any differences in operative duration, morbidity, or mortality in multivariate regression analyses, and there were no statistically significant differences in observed outcomes in any category.
Data source: The study reviewed 1,377 cardiac and 1682 general thoracic operations performed from July 2011 to July 2013 by attending, case type, and whether the attending was simultaneously supervising two surgeries.
Disclosures: Dr. Yount had no disclosures.
