为肿瘤试验中的胃切除术开发可靠的手术质量保证工具。

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Gastric Cancer Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-05-18 DOI:10.1007/s10120-024-01503-8
A Harris, J B Butterworth, P R Boshier, S Mavroveli, B Vadhwana, C J Peters, B W Eom, C-C Yeh, S Mikhail, M Sasako, Y-W Kim, G B Hanna
{"title":"为肿瘤试验中的胃切除术开发可靠的手术质量保证工具。","authors":"A Harris, J B Butterworth, P R Boshier, S Mavroveli, B Vadhwana, C J Peters, B W Eom, C-C Yeh, S Mikhail, M Sasako, Y-W Kim, G B Hanna","doi":"10.1007/s10120-024-01503-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite its recognized importance, there is currently no reliable tool for surgical quality assurance (SQA) of gastrectomy in surgical oncology. The aim of this study was to develop an SQA tool for gastrectomy and to apply this tool within the ADDICT Trial in order to assess the extent and completeness of lymphadenectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The operative steps for D1+ and D2 gastrectomy have been previously described in the literature and ADDICT trial manual. Two researchers also performed fieldwork in the UK and Japan to document key operative steps through photographs and semi-structured interviews with expert surgeons. This provided the steps that were used as the framework for the SQA tool. Sixty-two photographic cases from the ADDICT Trial were rated by three independent surgeons. Generalizability (G) theory determined inter-rater reliability. D-studies examined the effect of varying the number of assessors and photographic series they rated. Chi-square assessed intra-rater reliability, comparing how the individual assessor's responses corresponded to their global rating for extent of lymphadenectomy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The tool comprised 20 items, including 19 anatomical landmarks and a global rating score. Overall reliability had G-coefficient of 0.557. Internal consistency was measured with a Cronbach's alpha score of 0.869 and Chi-square confirmed intra-rater reliability for each assessor as < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A photographic surgical quality assurance tool is presented for gastrectomy. Using this tool, the assessor can reliably determine not only the quality but also the extent of the lymphadenectomy performed based on remaining anatomy rather than the excised specimen.</p>","PeriodicalId":12684,"journal":{"name":"Gastric Cancer","volume":" ","pages":"876-883"},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11193692/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Development of a reliable surgical quality assurance tool for gastrectomy in oncological trials.\",\"authors\":\"A Harris, J B Butterworth, P R Boshier, S Mavroveli, B Vadhwana, C J Peters, B W Eom, C-C Yeh, S Mikhail, M Sasako, Y-W Kim, G B Hanna\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10120-024-01503-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite its recognized importance, there is currently no reliable tool for surgical quality assurance (SQA) of gastrectomy in surgical oncology. The aim of this study was to develop an SQA tool for gastrectomy and to apply this tool within the ADDICT Trial in order to assess the extent and completeness of lymphadenectomy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The operative steps for D1+ and D2 gastrectomy have been previously described in the literature and ADDICT trial manual. Two researchers also performed fieldwork in the UK and Japan to document key operative steps through photographs and semi-structured interviews with expert surgeons. This provided the steps that were used as the framework for the SQA tool. Sixty-two photographic cases from the ADDICT Trial were rated by three independent surgeons. Generalizability (G) theory determined inter-rater reliability. D-studies examined the effect of varying the number of assessors and photographic series they rated. Chi-square assessed intra-rater reliability, comparing how the individual assessor's responses corresponded to their global rating for extent of lymphadenectomy.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The tool comprised 20 items, including 19 anatomical landmarks and a global rating score. Overall reliability had G-coefficient of 0.557. Internal consistency was measured with a Cronbach's alpha score of 0.869 and Chi-square confirmed intra-rater reliability for each assessor as < 0.05.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A photographic surgical quality assurance tool is presented for gastrectomy. Using this tool, the assessor can reliably determine not only the quality but also the extent of the lymphadenectomy performed based on remaining anatomy rather than the excised specimen.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12684,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gastric Cancer\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"876-883\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11193692/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gastric Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-024-01503-8\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/5/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastric Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10120-024-01503-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/5/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:尽管胃切除术的重要性已得到公认,但目前尚无可靠的胃切除术手术质量保证(SQA)工具。本研究旨在开发一种胃切除术的 SQA 工具,并将该工具应用于 ADDICT 试验,以评估淋巴结切除的范围和完整性:D1+和D2胃切除术的手术步骤先前已在文献和ADDICT试验手册中描述过。两名研究人员还在英国和日本进行了实地考察,通过照片和对专家外科医生的半结构式访谈记录了关键的手术步骤。这些步骤被用作 SQA 工具的框架。三位独立外科医生对 ADDICT 试验中的 62 张照片病例进行了评分。通用性 (G) 理论决定了评分者之间的可靠性。D 研究考察了不同评估者人数和他们所评估的照片系列的影响。Chi-square评估了评定者内部的可靠性,比较了各个评定者的回答与他们对淋巴腺切除范围的总体评分之间的对应关系:该工具由 20 个项目组成,包括 19 个解剖标志和一个总体评分。总体可靠性的 G 系数为 0.557。内部一致性的Cronbach's alpha值为0.869,Chi-square证实了每位评估者的评分内可靠性为结论:本文介绍了一种用于胃切除术的摄影手术质量保证工具。使用该工具,评估者不仅可以根据剩余的解剖结构而不是切除的标本可靠地确定淋巴腺切除术的质量和范围。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Development of a reliable surgical quality assurance tool for gastrectomy in oncological trials.

Background: Despite its recognized importance, there is currently no reliable tool for surgical quality assurance (SQA) of gastrectomy in surgical oncology. The aim of this study was to develop an SQA tool for gastrectomy and to apply this tool within the ADDICT Trial in order to assess the extent and completeness of lymphadenectomy.

Methods: The operative steps for D1+ and D2 gastrectomy have been previously described in the literature and ADDICT trial manual. Two researchers also performed fieldwork in the UK and Japan to document key operative steps through photographs and semi-structured interviews with expert surgeons. This provided the steps that were used as the framework for the SQA tool. Sixty-two photographic cases from the ADDICT Trial were rated by three independent surgeons. Generalizability (G) theory determined inter-rater reliability. D-studies examined the effect of varying the number of assessors and photographic series they rated. Chi-square assessed intra-rater reliability, comparing how the individual assessor's responses corresponded to their global rating for extent of lymphadenectomy.

Results: The tool comprised 20 items, including 19 anatomical landmarks and a global rating score. Overall reliability had G-coefficient of 0.557. Internal consistency was measured with a Cronbach's alpha score of 0.869 and Chi-square confirmed intra-rater reliability for each assessor as < 0.05.

Conclusions: A photographic surgical quality assurance tool is presented for gastrectomy. Using this tool, the assessor can reliably determine not only the quality but also the extent of the lymphadenectomy performed based on remaining anatomy rather than the excised specimen.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Gastric Cancer
Gastric Cancer 医学-胃肠肝病学
CiteScore
14.70
自引率
2.70%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Gastric Cancer is an esteemed global forum that focuses on various aspects of gastric cancer research, treatment, and biology worldwide. The journal promotes a diverse range of content, including original articles, case reports, short communications, and technical notes. It also welcomes Letters to the Editor discussing published articles or sharing viewpoints on gastric cancer topics. Review articles are predominantly sought after by the Editor, ensuring comprehensive coverage of the field. With a dedicated and knowledgeable editorial team, the journal is committed to providing exceptional support and ensuring high levels of author satisfaction. In fact, over 90% of published authors have expressed their intent to publish again in our esteemed journal.
期刊最新文献
Correction: Real-world effectiveness and safety of trastuzumab-deruxtecan in Japanese patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer (EN-DEAVOR study). Survival outcomes of patients with gastric cancer treated with first-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy based on claudin 18.2 expression. Decorin as a key marker of desmoplastic cancer-associated fibroblasts mediating first-line immune checkpoint blockade resistance in metastatic gastric cancer. Predictors of tolerability for postoperative adjuvant S1 plus docetaxel chemotherapy for gastric cancer: a multicenter retrospective study. Short-term outcomes of a phase II trial of perioperative capecitabine plus oxaliplatin therapy for advanced gastric cancer with extensive lymph node metastases (OGSG1701).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1