Top

International Journal of Colorectal Disease

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Rectal Cancer | RESEARCH

The utility of synoptic operation reports in colorectal surgery: a systematic review

Authors: Amanda Nikolic, Isaac Tranter-Entwistle, Andrew McCombie, Saxon Connor, Tim Eglinton

Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Purpose

Accurate documentation is crucial in surgical patient care. Synoptic reports (SR) are structured checklist-based reports that offer a standardised alternative to traditional narrative reports (NR). This systematic review aims to assess the completeness of SR compared to NR in colorectal cancer (CRC) surgery. Secondary outcomes include the time to completion, surgeon satisfaction, educational value, research value, and barriers to implementation.

Methods

Prospective or retrospective studies that assessed SR compared to NR in colorectal cancer surgery procedures were identified through a systematic search of Ovid MEDLINE, Embase (Ovid), CIHNAL Plus with Full Text (EBSCOhost), and Cochrane. One thousand two articles were screened, and eight studies met the inclusion criteria after full-text review of 17 papers.

Results

Analysis included 1797 operative reports (NR, 729; SR, 1068). Across studies reporting this outcome, the completeness of documentation was significantly higher in SR (P < 0.001). Reporting of secondary outcomes was limited, with a predominant focus on research value. Several studies demonstrated significantly reduced data extraction times when utilising SR. Surgeon satisfaction with SR was high, and these reports were seen as valuable tools for research and education. Barriers to implementation included integrating SR into existing electronic medical records (EMR) and surgeon concerns regarding increased administrative burden.

Conclusions

SR offer advantages in completeness, data extraction, and communication compared to NR. Surgeons perceive them as beneficial for research, quality improvement, and teaching. This review supports the necessity for development of user-friendly SR that seamlessly integrate into pre-existing EMRs, optimising patient care and enhancing the quality of CRC surgical documentation.

Lum SS, Vora HP (2022) Synoptic operative reports: can form follow function in surgery? Ann Surg Oncol 29:6515–6517. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11564-7CrossRefPubMed

Buchanan J, McCombie A, Connor S, Eglinton T (2022) Improving operative documentation in colorectal cancer surgery: synoptic notes pave the way forward. Anz J Surg 92:1754–1759. https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.17643CrossRefPubMed

Maniar RL, Sytnik P, Wirtzfeld DA et al (2015) Synoptic operative reports enhance documentation of best practices for rectal cancer: Synoptic Operative Reports. Jso 112:555–560. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.24039CrossRef

Kanters AE, Vu JV, Schuman AD et al (2020) Completeness of operative reports for rectal cancer surgery. Am J Surg 220:165–169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.09.036CrossRefPubMed

Brown PJ, Rossington H, Taylor J et al (2019) Standardised reports with a template format are superior to free text reports: the case for rectal cancer reporting in clinical practice. Eur Radiol 29:5121–5128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-019-06028-8CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Messenger DE, McLeod RS, Kirsch R (2011) What impact has the introduction of a synoptic report for rectal cancer had on reporting outcomes for specialist gastrointestinal and nongastrointestinal pathologists? Arch Pathol Lab Med 135:1471–1475. https://doi.org/10.5858/arpa.2010-0558-oaCrossRefPubMed

Bidwell SS, Merrell SB, Poles G et al (2020) Implementation of a synoptic operative report for rectal cancer: a mixed-methods study. Dis Colon Rectum 63:190–199. https://doi.org/10.1097/dcr.0000000000001518CrossRefPubMed

Stogryn S, Hardy KM, Abou-Setta AM et al (2019) Advancement in the quality of operative documentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of synoptic versus narrative operative reporting. Am J Surg 218:624–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.05.003CrossRefPubMed

Eryigit Ö, van de Graaf FW, Lange JF (2019) A systematic review on the synoptic operative report versus the narrative operative report in surgery. World J Surg 43:2175–2185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-019-05017-8CrossRefPubMed

10.

DeOrio JK (2002) Surgical templates for orthopedic operative reports. Orthopedics 25:639–642. https://doi.org/10.3928/0147-7447-20020601-13CrossRefPubMed

11.

Gur I, Gur D, Recabaren JA (2012) The computerized synoptic operative report: a novel tool in surgical residency education. Arch Surg-chicago 147:71–74. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.2011.228CrossRefPubMed

12.

Edhemovic I, Temple WJ, de Gara CJ, Stuart GCE (2004) The computer synoptic operative report—a leap forward in the science of surgery. Ann Surg Oncol 11:941–947. https://doi.org/10.1245/aso.2004.12.045CrossRefPubMed

13.

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM et al (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg 88:105906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906CrossRefPubMed

14.

Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.j4008CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

15.

Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174CrossRefPubMed

16.

Bidwell SS, Poles GC, Shelton AA et al (2022) Motivations and barriers toward implementation of a rectal cancer synoptic operative report: a process evaluation. Dis Colon Rectum 65:353–360. https://doi.org/10.1097/dcr.0000000000002202CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

17.

Robertson RL, Vergis A (2020) Synoptic operative reporting: documentation of quality of care data for rectal cancer surgery. Am Surg 86:184–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/000313482008600325CrossRefPubMed

18.

Maniar RL, Hochman DJ, Wirtzfeld DA et al (2014) Documentation of quality of care data for colon cancer surgery: comparison of synoptic and dictated operative reports. Ann Surg Oncol 21:3592–3597. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3741-3CrossRefPubMed

19.

Berlet M, Vogel T, Ostler D et al (2022) Surgical reporting for laparoscopic cholecystectomy based on phase annotation by a convolutional neural network (CNN) and the phenomenon of phase flickering: a proof of concept. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 17:1991–1999. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-022-02680-6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Hieken TJ, Burns WR, Francescatti AB et al (2022) Technical standards for cancer surgery: improving patient care through synoptic operative reporting. Ann Surg Oncol 29:6526–6533. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11330-9CrossRefPubMed

21.

Glasgow SC, Morris AM, Baxter NN et al (2016) Development of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons’ Rectal Cancer Surgery Checklist. Dis Colon Rectum 59:601–606. https://doi.org/10.1097/dcr.0000000000000606CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

22.

You YN, Hardiman KM, Bafford A et al (2020) The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Rectal Cancer. Dis Colon Rectum 63:1191–1222. https://doi.org/10.1097/dcr.0000000000001762CrossRefPubMed

23.

Tranter-Entwistle I, Eglinton T, Hugh TJ, Connor S (2022) Use of prospective video analysis to understand the impact of technical difficulty on operative process during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. HPB 24:2096–2103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hpb.2022.07.013CrossRefPubMed

24.

Curtis NJ, Foster JD, Miskovic D et al (2020) Association of surgical skill assessment with clinical outcomes in cancer surgery. Jama Surg 155:590–598. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2020.1004CrossRefPubMed

25.

McGory ML, Shekelle PG, Ko CY (2006) Development of Quality Indicators for Patients Undergoing Colorectal Cancer Surgery. Jnci J National Cancer Inst 98:1623–1633. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djj438CrossRef

26.

Gagliardi AR, Simunovic M, Langer B et al (2005) Development of quality indicators for colorectal cancer surgery, using a 3-step modified Delphi approach. Can J Surg J Can De Chir 48:441–52

Title: The utility of synoptic operation reports in colorectal surgery: a systematic review
Authors: Amanda Nikolic
Isaac Tranter-Entwistle
Andrew McCombie
Saxon Connor
Tim Eglinton
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Keywords: Rectal Cancer
Rectal Cancer
Colorectal Cancer
Colorectal Cancer
Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease / Issue 1/2024
Print ISSN: 0179-1958
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1262
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-024-04613-y

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The utility of synoptic operation reports in colorectal surgery: a systematic review

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Factors influencing the outcomes of colonic resections for Crohn’s colitis

Immunotherapy in rectal cancer patients—a propensity score matched analysis of the National Cancer Database

Correction to: Robotic versus laparoscopic colectomy outcomes in colon adenocarcinoma in the elderly population: a propensity-score matched analysis of the National Cancer Database

Sacral Neuromodulation for defecation disorders after non oncologic pelvic surgery

Correction to: Two-stage laparoscopic transversus abdominis plane block as an equivalent alternative to thoracic epidural anaesthesia in bowel resection—an explorative cohort study

Bowel preparation for elective colorectal resection: multi-treatment machine learning analysis on 6241 cases from a prospective Italian cohort