Journal of the American College of Surgeons
Volume 211, Issue 3 , Pages 308-315 , September 2010

Electronic Synoptic Operative Reporting: Assessing the Reliability and Completeness of Synoptic Reports for Pancreatic Resection

  • Jason Park, MD, FRCSC, MEd

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
    • ,
  • Venu G. Pillarisetty, MD

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
    • ,
  • Murray F. Brennan, MD, FACS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    • ,
  • William R. Jarnagin, MD, FACS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    • ,
  • Michael I. D'Angelica, MD, FACS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    • ,
  • Ronald P. DeMatteo, MD, FACS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    • ,
  • Daniel G Coit, MD, FACS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    • ,
  • Maria Janakos, BS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    • ,
  • Peter J. Allen, MD, FACS

      Affiliations

    • Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorrespondence address: Peter J Allen, MD, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Ave, New York, NY 10021

Received 3 March 2010 ,Accepted 5 March 2010.

References 

  1. Novitsky YW, Sing RF, Kercher KW, et al. Prospective, blinded evaluation of accuracy of operative reports dictated by surgical residents. Am Surg. 2005;71:627–631discussion 631–632
  2. Flynn MB, Allen DA. The operative note as billing documentation: a preliminary report. Am Surg. 2004;70:570–574discussion 574–575
  3. Mack LA, Bathe OF, Hebert MA, et al. Opening the black box of cancer surgery quality: WebSMR and the Alberta experience. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99:525–530
  4. Weymuller EA, Ahmad K, Casiano RR, et al. Surgical reporting instrument designed to improve outcome data in head and neck cancer trials. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1994;103:499–509
  5. Lefter LP, Walker SR, Dewhurst F, Turner RW. An audit of operative notes: facts and ways to improve. ANZ J Surg. 2008;78:800–802
  6. Edhemovic I, Temple WJ, de Gara CJ, Stuart GC. The computer synoptic operative report–a leap forward in the science of surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:941–947
  7. Harvey A, Zhang H, Nixon J, Brown CJ. Comparison of data extraction from standardized versus traditional narrative operative reports for database-related research and quality control. Surgery. 2007;141:708–714
  8. Laflamme MR, Dexter PR, Graham MF, et al. Efficiency, comprehensiveness and cost-effectiveness when comparing dictation and electronic templates for operative reports. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2005;425–429
  9. Eichholz AC, Van Voorhis BJ, Sorosky JI, et al. Operative note dictation: should it be taught routinely in residency programs?. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;103:342–346
  10. Scherer R, Zhu Q, Langenberg P, et al. Comparison of information obtained by operative note abstraction with that recorded on a standardized data collection form. Surgery. 2003;133:324–330
  11. Cowan DA, Sands MB, Rabizadeh SM, et al. Electronic templates versus dictation for the completion of Mohs micrographic surgery operative notes. Dermatol Surg. 2007;33:588–595
  12. Vergis A, Gillman L, Minor S, et al. Structured assessment format for evaluating operative reports in general surgery. Am J Surg. 2008;195:24–29
  13. Operative Reports. http://www.jointcommission.org/AccreditationPrograms/Office-BasedSurgery/Standards/09_FAQs/IM/Operative_Reports.htm2008;Accessed January 4, 2010
  14. Lynn MR. Determination and quantification of content validity. Nurs Res. 1986;35:382–385
  15. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull. 1979;86:420–428
  16. Savoldelli GL, Naik VN, Park J, et al. Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management: oral versus video-assisted oral feedback. Anesthesiology. 2006;105:279–285
  17. Zarbo RJ. Interinstitutional assessment of colorectal carcinoma surgical pathology report adequacy (A College of American Pathologists Q-Probes study of practice patterns from 532 laboratories and 15,940 reports). Arch Pathol Lab Med. 1992;116:1113–1119
  18. Srigley JR, McGowan T, Maclean A, et al. Standardized synoptic cancer pathology reporting: a population-based approach. J Surg Oncol. 2009;99:517–524
  19. Cyr L, Francis K. Measures of clinical agreement for nominal and categorical data: the kappa coefficient. Comput Biol Med. 1992;22:239–246
  20. Cook DA, Beckman TJ. Current concepts in validity and reliability for psychometric instruments: theory and application. Am J Med. 2006;119:166.e7–166.e16
  21. DeOrio JK. Surgical templates for orthopedic operative reports. Orthopedics. 2002;25:639–642
  22. Khuri SF. The NSQIP: a new frontier in surgery. Surgery. 2005;138:837–843

 Disclosure Information: Nothing to disclose.

 Awarded Poster of Exceptional Merit at the American College of Surgeons 95th Annual Clinical Congress, Scientific Exhibits, Chicago, IL, October 2009.

PII: S1072-7515(10)00359-5

doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.05.008

Journal of the American College of Surgeons
Volume 211, Issue 3 , Pages 308-315 , September 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution