Please wait...


Bhangu A, Li E; COVIDSurg Collaborative, Fisher A, Manku B.

Aim: This study aimed to describe the change in surgical practice and the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on mortality after surgical resection of colorectal cancer during the initial phases of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.

Method: This was an international cohort study of patients undergoing elective colon or rectal cancer resection, without preoperative suspicion of SARS-CoV-2. Centres entered data from their first recorded case of COVID-19 until 19 April 2020. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included anastomotic leak, postoperative SARS-CoV-2, and a comparison with a pre-pandemic European Society of Coloproctology cohort data.

Results: From 2073 patients in 40 countries, 1.3% (27/2073) had a defunctioning stoma and 3.0% (63/2073) had an end stoma instead of an anastomosis only. 30-day mortality was 1.8% (38/2073), the incidence of postoperative SARS-CoV-2 was 3.8% (78/2073), and the anastomotic leak rate was 4.9% (86/1738). Mortality was lowest in patients without a leak or SARS-CoV2 (14/1601, 0.9%), and highest in patients with both a leak and SARS-CoV-2 (5/13, 38.5%). Mortality was independently associated with an anastomotic leak (adjusted odds ratio 6.01, 95% confidence interval 2.58-14.06), postoperative SARS-CoV-2 (16.90, 7.86-36.38), male sex (2.46, 1.01-5.93), age >70 years (2.87, 1.32-6.20), and advanced cancer stage (3.43, 1.16-10.21). Compared to pre-pandemic data, there were fewer anastomotic leaks (4.9% versus 7.7%), an overall shorter length of stay (6 versus 7 days), but higher mortality (1.7% versus 1.1%).

Conclusion: Surgeons need to further mitigate against both SARS-CoV-2 and anastomotic leak when offering surgery during current and future COVID-19 waves based on patient, operative, and organisational risks.



Houssaini K, Lahnaoui O, Souadka A, Majbar MA, Ghanam A, El Ahmadi B, Belkhadir Z, Amrani L, Mohsine R, Benkabbou A.

Background: The aggregate root cause analysis (AggRCA) was designed to improve the understanding of system vulnerabilities contributing to patient harm, including surgical complications. It remains poorly used due to methodological complexity and resource limitations. This study aimed to identify the main patterns contributing to severe complications after liver resection using an AggRCA.

Methods: This was a retrospective qualitative study aimed to identify the main patterns contributing to severe complications, defined as strictly higher than grade IIIa according to the Clavien-Dindo classification within the first 90 days after liver resection. All consecutive severe complications that occurred between January 1st, 2018 and December 31st, 2019 were identified from an electronic database and included in an AggRCA. This included a structured morbidity and mortality review (MMR) reporting tool based on 50 contributory factors adapted from 6 ALARM categories: « Patient », « Tasks », « Individual staff », « Team », « Work environment », and « Management and Institutional context ». Data resulting from individual-participant root cause analysis (RCA) of single-cases were validated collectively then aggregated. The main patterns were suggested from the contributory factors reported in more than half of the cases.

Results: In 105 consecutive liver resection cases, 15 patients (14.3%) developed severe postoperative complications, including 5 (4.8%) who died. AggRCA resulted in the identification of 36 contributory factors. Eight contributory factors were reported in more than half of the cases and were compiled in three entangled patterns: (1) Disrupted perioperative process, (2) Unplanned intraoperative change, (3) Ineffective communication.

Conclusion: A pragmatic aggregated RCA process improved our understanding of system vulnerabilities based on the analysis of a limited number of events and a reasonable resource intensity. The identification of patterns contributing to severe complications lay the rationale of future contextualized safety interventions beyond the scope of liver resections.



Majbar MA, Majbar Y, Benkabbou A, Amrani L, Bougtab A, Mohsine R, Souadka A.

Background: The learning environment is one of the most influential factors in training of medical residents. The Dutch Residency Educational Climate Test (D-RECT) is one of the strongest instruments for measuring the learning environment. However, it has not been translated in French. The objective of this study is the psychometric validation of the DRECT French version.

Material and methods: After translation of the D-RECT questionnaire into French, residents of five Moroccan hospitals were invited to complete the questionnaire between July and September 2018. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate the validity of the construct using the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR), the root mean square error approximation (RMSEA), the Comparative Fit Index (CFI) and the Tucker- Lewis Index (TLI). Reliability analysis was analysed using Internal consistency and Test-retest.

Results: During the study period, 211 residents completed the questionnaire. Confirmatory factor analysis showed an adequate model fit with the following indicators: SRMR = 0.058 / RMSEA = 0.07 / CFI = 0.88 / TLI = 0.87. The French translation had a good internal consistency (Cronbach alpha score > 0.7 for all subscales) and a good temporal stability (correlation score between two measurements = 0.89).

Conclusion: This French version has an acceptable validity of the construct, a good internal consistency and good temporal reliability, and may be used to evaluate the learning climate. Additional research is necessary in other French-speaking contexts, in order to confirm these results.



Amine Souadka, Mohammed Anass Majbar, Khalid El Himdi, Ismail Kassou, Hind Mrabti, Tijani El Harroudi, Mohammed Ahallat, Abdelkader Belkouchi, Raouf Mohsine, Abdelmalek Hrora, Amine Benkabbou

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL AND SURGICAL RESEARCH – Vol. VII, n 1, June, 2020; Pages: 748-754

Abstract:

Background: Surgical audit experiments have shown a positive, rapid and cost-effective impact on complication rates, recurrence rates, and overall survival even in the absence of interventional measures in digestive cancers. This study audit the quality of surgical procedures for digestive cancers.

Methods: This is a multicentric prospective non-comparative observational study performed in 4 surgical departments in 2 university centers. Eligible patients are adults scheduled for elective surgery for a proven or suspected digestive cancer, in a curative or palliative intent; or included no later than 72 hours after surgery in case of an emergent procedure. The Cancer should be proven or suspected in the following digestive tract: colon, appendix, anus, rectum, esophagus, stomach, esogastric junction, bile ducts, ampulla of Vater, pancreas, duodenum, small intestine and liver. Patients are excluded in case of 1) surgical intervention indicated for: a condition that is not a digestive tract cancer; 2) proven or suspected cancer of non-digestive location 3) a proven or suspected cancer of peritoneal localization. 4) surgical intervention indicated for a progressive disease or a local recurrence proven or suspected of a digestive localization cancer having already been resected (with the exception of situations of iterative liver resection for liver metastasis hepatic and recovery of the tumor bed after the discovery of vesicular cancer on cholecystectomy specimen); 5) intervention is for diagnostic purposes without any curative or palliative intention

A total of 1500 patients is expected. The primary objectives of this study are to assess both 90 days of post-operative outcomes and three years oncological outcomes for patient operated for each included digestive cancer. Secondary objectives arre 1)to analyze treatment decisions made within multidisciplinary team meeting/tumour board for every localization and the completion of preoperative workup staging according to local guidelines and 2) to determine the impact of reporting anonymous trimestrial feedback to surgeons on improving their surgical performance and outcomes 3) To assess quality of life in patient operated for colorectal cancer in curative intent.

Discussion: This is the first multicentric north african registry assessing the quality of surgical procedures for digestive tract cancer and analyzing the impact of reporting sequential anonymous feedback to the surgeon on quality improvement.

Keywords: Qualtiy, Rectal Neoplasms, Digestive cancer, obsergatory, Multicentric cohort study, Surgical procedures



Anass M. Majbar, Amine Benkabbou, Raouf Mohsine, Amine Souadka

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL AND SURGICAL RESEARCH – Vol. VI, n 3, February 2020; Pages: 724-733;

Abstract:

The COVID 19 outbreak has caused the cancellation of most elective oncological surgery around the world to limit the risk of virus dissemination. As we are exiting the crisis, surgical teams will face strong challenges while resuming normal elective surgery. The accumulation of cases will have to be managed by defining strong selection criteria, taking into account the patient and the disease conditions. In order to reduce the risk of infection, non-COVID patients should be treated in dedicated non-COVID areas, preferably in separate buildings or hospitals. Departments, units and operative theaters should put in place rigorous actions and protocols to protect the patient and healthcare workers. Adequate protective equipment must be readily available for healthcare workers and patients. Finally, teams should keep an adaptive mindset by preparing strategies to maintain surgical activity in case of repeated COVID 19 waves.

Keywords: COVID 19, Guidelines, Lockdown ease, Surgical oncology



Chaimae Charoui, Amine Souadka, Saber Boutayeb, Rachida Latib, Laila Rifai, Laila Amrani, Amine Benkabbou, Raouf Mohsine, Mohammed Anass Majbar

JOURNAL OF MEDICAL AND SURGICAL RESEARCH – Vol. VII, n 1, June, 2020. Pages: 764-769

Abstract:

Introduction: The multidisciplinary team oncology meeting (MDT) has become a standard in oncology. The objective of this study was to evaluate the value of a validated tool, the Metric for the Observation of Decision-Making, in the evaluation of the decision-making mode during the digestive cancer MDT in order to reach recommendations for improvement.

Results: Eight consecutive MDTs were observed (N = 228 patients). On average, 32 patients were discussed by MDT with an average of 2 min 55 s (interval: 30 s-10 min 16 s) per patient. A decision was reached in 84.6% of the cases. Although the medical information was judged to be of good quality, the psychosocial information (average 1.29) and the patients’ point of view (average 1.03) were judged to be of low quality. For teamwork, the contribution of surgeons (average 4.56) and oncologists (average 3.99) was greater than radiologists (3.12), radiotherapists (1.74) and pathologists (1.02).

Conclusions: The tool made it possible to identify a disparity in the quality of the different aspects of the information and in the participation of specialists, making it possible to identify specific improvement measures. Its regular use would improve the quality of patient care.

Keywords: Decision making, Quality improvement, Multidisciplinary concertation meeting, MDT-MODe, Morocco


Copyright by Digital Zone 2018. All rights reserved.