Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 May;28(5):2685-2691. doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-09203-0. Epub 2020 Oct 15.
Numerous factors likely influence adoption of surgical innovations in large regions. We considered the role of comparative advantage, surgeon enthusiasm, and opinion leaders on uptake of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) for colorectal cancer (CRC) metastases in Ontario.
We used administrative data for patients undergoing liver resection for CRC metastases from years 2006-2015. Fourteen regions were divided into three groups based on overall rate of MILR for CRC metastases. Outcomes included postoperative complications, length of hospital stay (LOS), operative mortality, and 1-year survival. We evaluated uptake of MILR among groups and within groups between opinion leader and nonopinion leader surgeons.
There were 2675 patients in the low-rate (n = 937), medium-rate (n = 919), and high-rate (n = 819) groups. In these same groups, the number of opinion leader surgeons was six, five, and six. Patient outcomes were similar among groups, except in the low-rate group LOS was 1 day greater (7 vs. 6 and 6; p = 0.017). The rate of MILR for CRC metastases did not change significantly among opinion leaders in any group. This rate among nonopinion leader surgeons was steady and low in the low-rate group (1.7-8.0%, p = 0.80) and increased in the mid-rate group (2.4-31.8%, p = 0.0026) and in the high-rate group (7.7-40.9%, p < 0.001).
Greater use of MILR was associated with a 1-day shorter LOS. Relative enthusiasm for MILR for CRC metastases among a small number of opinion leader surgeons likely facilitated or dampened uptake of this complex innovation.
许多因素可能会影响大型地区对手术创新的采用。我们考虑了比较优势、外科医生的积极性和意见领袖在安大略省接受结直肠癌(CRC)转移的微创肝切除术(MILR)方面的作用。
我们使用了 2006 年至 2015 年期间接受 CRC 转移肝切除术的患者的行政数据。根据 CRC 转移 MILR 的总体比率,将 14 个地区分为三组。结果包括术后并发症、住院时间(LOS)、手术死亡率和 1 年生存率。我们评估了意见领袖和非意见领袖外科医生之间各组和组内 MILR 的采用情况。
低比率(n=937)、中比率(n=919)和高比率(n=819)组分别有 2675 例患者。在这些相同的组中,意见领袖外科医生的数量分别为 6、5 和 6。除了低比率组的 LOS 长 1 天(7 比 6 和 6;p=0.017)外,各组之间的患者预后相似。CRC 转移 MILR 的比率在任何组中的意见领袖都没有显著变化。在低比率组中,非意见领袖外科医生的 MILR 比率保持稳定且较低(1.7-8.0%,p=0.80),在中比率组中增加(2.4-31.8%,p=0.0026),在高比率组中增加(7.7-40.9%,p<0.001)。
MILR 的使用较多与 LOS 缩短 1 天相关。少数意见领袖对外科医生接受 CRC 转移 MILR 的相对积极性可能促进或抑制了这种复杂创新的采用。