A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the impact of resident duty hours (RDH) on clinical and educational outcomes in surgery. A total of 135 articles met inclusion criteria. In surgery, recent RDH changes are not consistently associated with improved resident well-being and may have negative impacts on patient outcomes and education.

Evidence indicates that ERAS protocols may be implemented in pancreatic surgery without compromising patient safety or increasing LoS. Enhanced recovery after surgery programmes in the context of pancreatic surgery should be standardized based upon the best available evidence, and trials of ERAS programmes involving multiple centres should be performed.

CPWs may generate cost savings by reducing unnecessary investigations, and improve quality of care through process standardization and decreasing practice variation.

Current management of CRC-LM does not reflect best evidence. Patients who may benefit from surgery are not being referred for metastasectomy. We have identified an evidence-practice gap at the level of physician, which should be targeted with novel quality improvement strategies.

Complete metastasectomy of multisite CRC is safe, but disease recurs in the majority of patients. Data suggest that aggressive multisite metastasectomy may provide OS benefit for selected patients.

Results suggest the CPW reduced variability and allowed a greater proportion of patients to receive all elements of care, resulting in improved quality and efficiency of care based on current best evidence recommendations.

BackgroundSurgery is a cornerstone of treatment for malignancy. However, significant variation has been reported in patterns and quality of cancer care for important health outcomes, including perioperative mortality. Surgical process improvement tools (SPITs) have been developed that focus on enhancing the processes of care at the point of care, as a means of quality improvement. This study describes SPITs and develops a conceptual framework by synthesizing the available literature on these novel quality improvement tools.MethodsA scoping review was conducted based on instruments developed for quality improvement in surgery. The search was executed on electronically indexed sources (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library) from January 1990 to March 2011. Data were extracted, tabulated and reported thematically using a narrative synthesis approach. These results were used to develop a conceptual framework that describes and classifies SPITs.Results232 articles were reviewed for data extraction and analysis. SPITs identified were classified into 3 groups: clinical mapping tools, structure communication tools and error reduction instruments. The dominant instrument reported were clinical mapping tools, including: clinical pathways (113, 48%), fast track (46, 20%) and enhanced recovery after surgery protocols (36, 15%). Outcomes reported included: length of stay (174, 75%), readmission rates (116, 50%), morbidity (116, 50%), mortality (104, 45%), and economic (60, 26%). Many gaps in the literature were recognized.ConclusionWe have developed a conceptual framework of SPITs and identified gaps in current knowledge. These results will guide the design and development of new quality instruments in surgery.

Opinions from the surgical community highlight the complexity of issues surrounding the RDH restrictions and suggest that recent changes are not achieving all the desired outcomes and have resulted in unintended outcomes. From the perceptions of the various stakeholders in surgical education studied, areas for new policies were identified.