Establishing the influence of case complexity on the order of cataract lists: a cross-sectional survey

ObjectiveOrder of the theatre list and complexity of the cases are important considerations which are known to influence surgical outcomes. This survey aimed to establish their influence on cataract surgery.Methods and AnalysisCataract surgeons ordered five cataract cases according to their surgical preference, first using case notes and second using composite ORs (CORs) for posterior capsule rupture. Descriptive and non-parametric statistics were used to analyse the data.ResultsBetween 11 June and 14 July 2020, 192 cataract surgeons from 14 countries completed the online survey. Majority of the surgeons (142 vs 50) preferred to choose the order of their list (p<0.01) and to review the case notes prior to the day of surgery (89 vs 53; p=0.04). 39.86% preferred to start with the less risky case and 32.43% reserved the last position on the list for the riskiest case. There was a significant trend to order the list in an ascending level of risk, independent of whether case notes or CORs were used. Additionally, 44.79% of the respondents indicated they would be happy to have their list order planned by an automated program based on their preferred risk score.ConclusionThis survey demonstrates that cataract surgeons prefer to choose the order of their theatre list and that the order is dependent on the complexity of cases. There is support among surgeons for automated list ordering based on an objective score for risk stratification, such as a COR.

267 An Audit of The Management of Acute Cholecystitis At ELHT

Aim Acute cholecystitis is a common condition on the surgical take. The evidence shows that the optimal approach is with early laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients suitable for surgery (Cao, 2015). The aim of this audit was to assess the adherence of the surgical department at ELHT to NICE guidance CG 188 in the management of patients with gallstone disease (NICE, 2014): Offer early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (within 1 week of diagnosis) for acute cholecystitis. Method Retrospective study of all patients with image confirmed diagnosis of acute cholecystitis between 25th January to 1st October 2018. Any unsuitable candidates for surgery were not counted. Results The case notes of 153 patients were reviewed. 109 were included in this study, as the other patients were not likely to be offered surgery due to their comorbidities. Of these 109 patients, 51 (47%) had a laparoscopic cholecystectomy within a week of diagnosis. Conclusions ELHT is not meeting the target of management within 7 days for over half of patients. The modifiable reasons for not meeting the targeted treatment time are a lack of capacity in theatre and Consultants’ decisions to delay treatment. The addition of a dedicated hot gallbladder theatre list can increase the numbers treated within the target time.

454 Impact Of COVID-19 Pandemic on Elective Theatre Productivity in Otolaryngology

Aim COVID-19 has had a significant impact on otolaryngology surgery. There are new requirements to prepare patients for theatre however the impact on theatre productivity is unknown. This study aims to evaluate the impact of COVID-19 on elective theatre productivity. Method We conducted a retrospective evaluation of elective otolaryngology theatre lists. Ten consecutive theatre lists beginning on the final week of November 2019 and November 2020 were analysed. Dedicated emergency operation lists were excluded. Results There were fewer operating lists per working day in 2020 (0.9) compared to 2019 (2.0) and a higher percentage of operations cancelled (2020: 15.4%, 2019: 8.6%). Theatre lists finished significantly earlier in 2020 than in 2019 (2020 median: 97.5 minutes, 2019 median: 15.5 minutes; p = 0.00018). The percentage of theatre lists finishing over 60 minutes early was substantially greater than the national average of 23% (2020: 75%, 2019: 30%). The median pre-list delay was higher in 2020 than 2019 (2019: 20.5 minutes, 2020: 31.5 minutes; p = 0.14) whilst the median total delay was higher in 2019 compared to 2020 (2019: 20.5 minutes, 2020: 18 minutes; p = 0.21). Both results were not statistically significant. The commonest reason for delay in 2020 were COVID-19 related reasons such as awaiting test results, in 2019 the commonest reason was patient not being ready for theatre such as consent not completed. Conclusions COVID-19 has had a significant impact on theatre productivity and is currently the commonest cause of theatre list delay. The early theatre finishing time suggest that improvements can be made to improve theatre productivity.

1503 Review of Electronic Theatre Coding System & Documentation of Neurosurgical Activity

Introduction It was noticed that the current electronic theatre coding system was limited in its reflection of departmental theatre activity and discrepancies in discharge letters compared to the actual operations performed. To prevent this from recurring, a standardised neurosurgical operation note was developed, and an audit of the electronic coding system was undertaken to see if the correct operation matched that of the code listed. Method A 6-month retrospective analysis from March to September 2020 was completed using the electronic theatre coding system, patients’ electronic records and the patient handover list. Results 232 operations performed and only 10.3% of procedures were correctly coded by the current coding system. 11 operations were not on the theatre system although performed in theatres. The current system only coded for 82 procedures and did not show the full range of operations. There was wide variety of operation notes and only 185 operation notes were found on the patients’ electronic record. Frequently the procedure was not clearly identified so juniors relied on the inaccurate electronic code on the theatre list for the patients’ operation hence explaining the problem identified in discharge letters. Conclusions A new coding list for the electronic theatre system was created with 228 procedures divided into correct subcategories. A standardised template for operation notes was also developed and implemented so that full neurosurgical departmental activity is reflected, and accurate discharge letters are completed so that complete data collection can be done for audit purposes.

258 Are Electronic Algorithmic Referral Systems the Future of Triage? Evaluating the Use of The Oxford Acute Referrals System (OARS) For Plastic Surgery

Introduction A traditional referral involves transfer of information over a telephone call and is typically documented in an unstructured format on paper notes, producing poor continuity of referrals between shifts, increasing the risk of error, and compromising patient safety. The Oxford Acute Referrals System (OARS) is an electronic platform that keeps a complete record of referrals, whilst providing the referring clinician with step-by-step specialist advice according to inbuilt BSSH guidelines. This audit demonstrates our experience of its’ use in a tertiary centre Plastics department. Method One week of referrals in 2019, prior to the implementation of OARS, were compared with the equivalent week in 2020 once OARS was established. Data was collected retrospectively using electronic patient records. Results In one week in 2019, 120 cases were reviewed in the emergency clinic compared with 155 OARS referrals for the equivalent week in 2020. Following OARS implementation, 69% of referred cases did not footfall in the emergency clinic. 46% were managed locally with specialist advice from Plastic Surgery. 10% were brought directly into a theatre list, of which 7% were subsequently treated conservatively. A Plastic surgery consultant reviewing OARS referrals taken by juniors, changed the decision of how or where to manage the patient in 6% of cases. Conclusions OARS is an effective triage system that has considerably reduced footfall in the emergency clinic, whilst simultaneously expediting patient care down the correct treatment pathway. Its use led to safe management of patients remotely, which has important implications during a pandemic.

872 Audit - Unexpected Overnight Stay After Day-Case Surgery In ENT

Introduction The aim of this audit was to determine the compliance with guidelines regarding patient selection for day-case surgeries in ENT. Method Data was collected retrospectively and included all patients who underwent elective ENT surgeries over a one-year period at an NHS hospital. Factors considered included nature of the operation, timing, surgeon’s preference, as well as social circumstances. Results Out of 1101 intended day cases, 113 (10%) had an unexpected overnight stay. The major factor contributing to these overnight stays was the timing of the operation, where 85 cases had undergone surgery in the afternoon. Other factors included drain siting, saturation monitoring, post-operative complications, and social circumstances. Tonsillectomy-related and nasal procedures formed the majority of the procedures, with 74 cases in total. Conclusions We concluded that most overnight stay cases included in this audit could have been prevented. Careful theatre list planning by prioritizing day cases for morning lists may reduce these numbers significantly. Co-morbidities and social aspects may need to be explored when booking patients for theatres.

The role of orthopaedic trainees during the COVID-19 pandemic and impact on post-graduate orthopaedic education

Aims The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on the provision of orthopaedic care across the UK. During the pandemic orthopaedic specialist registrars were redeployed to “frontline” specialties occupying non-surgical roles. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on orthopaedic training in the UK is unknown. This paper sought to examine the role of orthopaedic trainees during the COVID-19 and the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on postgraduate orthopaedic education. Methods A 42-point questionnaire was designed, validated, and disseminated via e-mail and an instant-messaging platform. Results A total of 101 orthopaedic trainees, representing the four nations (Wales, England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland), completed the questionnaire. Overall, 23.1% (23/101) of trainees were redeployed to non-surgical roles. Of these, 73% (17/23) were redeployed to intensive treatment units (ITUs), 13% (3/23) to A/E, and 13%(3/23%) to general medicine. Of the trainees redeployed to ITU 100%, (17/17) received formal induction. Non-deployed or returning trainees had a significant reduction in sessions. In total, 42.9% (42/101) % of trainees were not timetabled into fracture clinic, 53% (53/101) of trainees had one allocated theatre list per week, and 63.8%(64/101) of trainees did not feel they obtained enough experience in the attached subspecialty and preferred repeating this. Overall, 93% (93/101) of respondents attended at least one weekly online webinar, with 79% (79/101) of trainees rating these as useful or very useful, while 95% (95/101) trainees attended online deanery teaching which was rated as more useful than online webinars (p = 0.005) Conclusion Orthopaedic specialist trainees occupied an important role during the COVID-19 pandemic. COVID-19 has had a significant impact on orthopaedic training. It is imperative this is properly understood to ensure orthopaedic specialist trainees achieve competencies set out in the training curriculum. Cite this article: Bone Joint Open 2020;1-11:676–682.

The 'Surgical Time': a myth or reality? Surgeons' prediction of operating time and its effect on theatre scheduling

ObjectiveIn Australia, 2.7 million surgical procedures were performed in the year 2016–17. This number is ever increasing and requires effective management of operating theatre (OT) time. Preoperative prediction of theatre time is one of the main constituents of OT scheduling, and anecdotal evidence suggests that surgeons grossly underestimate predicted surgical time. The aim of this study is to assess surgeons’ accuracy at predicting OT times across different specialties and effective theatre scheduling. MethodsA database was created with de-identified patient information from a 3-month period (late 2016). The collected data included variables such as the predicted time, actual surgery time, and type of procedure (i.e. Emergency or Elective). These data were used to make quantifiable comparisons. ResultsData were categorised into a ‘Theatre list’ and ‘Scopes list’. This was further compared as ‘Actual–Predicted’ time, which ranged from an average underestimation of each procedure by 19min (Ear Nose and Throat surgeons) to an average overprediction of 13.5min (Plastic Surgery). Urgency of procedures (i.e. Emergency and Elective procedures) did not influence prediction time for the ‘Theatre list’, but did so for the ‘Scopes list’ (P&lt;0.001). Surgeons were poor at predicting OT times for complex operations and patients with high American Society of Anaesthesiologists grades. Overall, surgeons were fairly accurate with their OT prediction times across 1450 procedures, with an average underestimation of only 2.3 min. ConclusionsIn terms of global performance at The Queen Elizabeth Hospital institution, surgeons are fairly accurate at predicting OT times. Surgeons’ estimates should be used in planning theatre lists to avoid unnecessary over or underutilisation of resources. What is known about the topic?It is known that variables such as theatre changeover times and anaesthesia time are some of the factors that delay the scheduled start time of an OT. Furthermore, operating time depends on the personnel within the operating rooms such as the nursing staff, anaesthesiologists, team setup and day of time. Studies outside of Australia have shown that prediction models for OT times using individual characteristics and the surgeon’s estimate are effective. What does this paper add?This paper advocates for surgeons’ predicted OT time to be included in the process of theatre scheduling, which currently does not take place. It also provides analysis of a wide range of surgical specialties and assesses each professions’ ability to accurately predict the surgical time. This study encompasses a substantial number of procedures. Moreover, it compares endoscopic procedures separately to laparoscopic/open procedures. It contributes how different variables such as the urgency of procedure (Emergency/Elective), estimated length of procedure and patient comorbidities affect the prediction of OT time. What are the implications for practitioners?This will encourage hospital administrators to use surgeons’ predicted OT time in calculations for scheduling theatre lists. This will facilitate more accurate predictions of OT time and ensure that theatre lists are not over or underutilised. Moreover, surgeons will be encouraged to make OT time predictions with serious consideration, after understanding its effect on theatre scheduling and associated costs. Hence, the aim is to try to make an estimation of OT time, which is closer to the actual time required.