[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]

Association of Overlapping Surgery With Increased Risk for Complications Following Hip SurgeryA Population-Based, Matched Cohort Study

Educational Objective
To determine if overlapping surgery is associated with greater risk for complications following surgical treatment for hip fracture and arthritis.
1 Credit CME
Key Points

Question  What is the association of overlapping surgery with increased risks for complications following surgical treatment of hip fractures and end-stage arthritis?

Findings  In this population-based cohort study of patients with hip fracture and hip arthritis, there were 960 and 1560 overlapping procedures, respectively. For patients undergoing overlapping procedures, there was an approximately 90% increase in the risk for surgical complications at 1 year, although the association was weaker in elective hip replacements than in hip fractures.

Meaning  Overlapping surgery is associated with an increased risk for complications in hip surgery, particularly for nonelective procedures.

Abstract

Importance  Overlapping surgery, also known as double-booking, refers to a controversial practice in which a single attending surgeon supervises 2 or more operations, in different operating rooms, at the same time.

Objective  To determine if overlapping surgery is associated with greater risk for complications following surgical treatment for hip fracture and arthritis.

Design, Setting, and Participants  This was a retrospective population-based cohort study in Ontario, Canada (population, 13.6 million), for the years 2009 to 2014. There was 1 year of follow-up. This study encompassed 2 large cohorts. The “hip fracture” cohort captured all persons older than 60 years who underwent surgery for a hip fracture during the study period. The “total hip arthroplasty” (THA) cohort captured all primary elective THA recipients for arthritis during the study period. We matched overlapping and nonoverlapping hip fractures by patient age, patient sex, surgical procedure (for the hip fracture cohort), primary surgeon, and hospital.

Exposures  Procedures were identified as overlapping if they overlapped with another surgical procedure performed by the same primary attending surgeon by more than 30 minutes.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Complication (infection, revision, dislocation) within 1 year.

Results  There were 38 008 hip fractures, and of those, 960 (2.5%) were overlapping (mean age of patients, 66 years [interquartile range, 57-74 years]; 503 [52.4%] were female). There were 52 869 THAs and of those, 1560 (3.0%) overlapping (mean age, 84 years [interquartile range, 77-89 years]; 1293 [82.9%] were female). After matching, overlapping hip fracture procedures had a greater risk for a complication (hazard ratio [HR], 1.85; 95% CI, 1.27-2.71; P = .001), as did overlapping THA procedures (HR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.02-3.14; P = .04). Among overlapping hip fracture operations, increasing duration of operative overlap was associated with increasing risk for complications (adjusted odds ratio, 1.07 per 10-minute increase in overlap; P = .009).

Conclusions and Relevance  Overlapping surgery was relatively rare but was associated with an increased risk for surgical complications. Furthermore, increasing duration of operative overlap was associated with an increasing risk for complications. These findings support the notion that overlapping provision of surgery should be part of the informed consent process.

Sign in to take quiz and track your certificates

Buy This Activity

JN Learning™ is the home for CME and MOC from the JAMA Network. Search by specialty or US state and earn AMA PRA Category 1 CME Credit™ from articles, audio, Clinical Challenges and more. Learn more about CME/MOC

Article Information

Corresponding Author: Bheeshma Ravi, MD, PhD, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, 43 Wellesley St E, Room 315, Toronto, ON M4Y 1H1, Canada (heeshma.ravi@sunnybrook.ca).

Accepted for Publication: September 16, 2017.

Published Online: December 4, 2017. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.6835

Author Contributions: Dr Ravi had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Study concept and design: Ravi, Pincus, Wasserstein, Jenkinson, Paterson, Kreder.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Ravi, Pincus, Govindarajan, Huang, Austin, Jenkinson, Henry, Paterson.

Drafting of the manuscript: Ravi, Pincus, Wasserstein, Huang.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Ravi, Pincus, Wasserstein, Govindarajan, Austin, Jenkinson, Henry, Paterson, Kreder.

Statistical analysis: Ravi, Pincus, Wasserstein, Huang.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Ravi, Wasserstein, Jenkinson, Paterson.

Study supervision: Wasserstein, Jenkinson, Kreder.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported.

Funding/Support: This study was supported by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES), an independent research institute funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care. Parts of this material are based on data and information compiled and provided by the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI). This study was supported by internal funding from the Marvin Tile Chair in Orthopaedic Surgery at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, Canada.

Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The supporting organizations had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; or decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Disclaimer: The opinions, results, and conclusions reported in this study are those of the authors and are independent from the funding sources and CIHI. No endorsement by the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care and CIHI is intended or should be inferred.

References
1.
Beasley  GM, Pappas  TN, Kirk  AD.  Procedure delegation by attending surgeons performing concurrent operations in academic medical centers: balancing safety and efficiency.  Ann Surg. 2015;261(6):1044-1045.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
American College of Surgeons. Statements on Principles. 2016. https://www.facs.org/about-acs/statements/stonprin. Accessed October 18, 2017.
3.
Brown  MJ, Subramanian  A, Curry  TB, Kor  DJ, Moran  SL, Rohleder  TR.  Improving operating room productivity via parallel anesthesia processing.  Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2014;27(8):697-706.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). CMS Manual System Pub 100-04: Medicare Claims. 2011. https://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Transmittals/downloads/R2303CP.pdf]. Accessed October 18, 2017.
5.
Boston Globe. Clash in the name of care: a Spotlight Team Report. 2015. http://apps.bostonglobe.com/spotlight/clash-in-the-name-of-care/?p1=Clash_Story_to-landing. Accessed November 12, 2015.
7.
Mello  MM, Livingston  EH.  Managing the risks of concurrent surgeries.  JAMA. 2016;315(15):1563-1564.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Hyder  JA, Hanson  KT, Storlie  CB,  et al.  Safety of overlapping surgery at a high-volume referral center.  Ann Surg. 2017;265(4):639-644.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Zhang  AL, Sing  DC, Dang  DY,  et al.  Overlapping surgery in the ambulatory orthopaedic setting.  J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2016;98(22):1859-1867.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Ravi  B, Jenkinson  R, Austin  PC,  et al.  Relation between surgeon volume and risk of complications after total hip arthroplasty: propensity score matched cohort study.  BMJ. 2014;348:g3284.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Ravi  B, Croxford  R, Hollands  S,  et al.  Increased risk of complications following total joint arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.  Arthritis Rheumatol. 2014;66(2):254-263.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Do  LN, Kruke  TM, Foss  OA, Basso  T.  Reoperations and mortality in 383 patients operated with parallel screws for Garden I-II femoral neck fractures with up to ten years follow-up.  Injury. 2016;47(12):2739-2742.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Dodd  AC, Bulka  C, Jahangir  A, Mir  HR, Obremskey  WT, Sethi  MK.  Predictors of 30-day mortality following hip/pelvis fractures.  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2016;102(6):707-710.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Berggren  M, Stenvall  M, Englund  U, Olofsson  B, Gustafson  Y.  Co-morbidities, complications and causes of death among people with femoral neck fracture: a three-year follow-up study.  BMC Geriatr. 2016;16(120):120. doi:10.1186/s12877-016-0291-5PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Deyo  RA, Cherkin  DC, Ciol  MA.  Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases.  J Clin Epidemiol. 1992;45(6):613-619.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Weiner  JP, Abrams  C. The Johns Hopkins ACG® System: Technical Reference Guide. Version 10.0. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University;2011.
17.
McIsaac  DI, Bryson  GL, van Walraven  C.  Association of frailty and 1-year postoperative mortality following major elective noncardiac surgery: a population-based cohort study.  JAMA Surg. 2016;151(6):538-545.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Stukel  TA, Fisher  ES, Alter  DA,  et al.  Association of hospital spending intensity with mortality and readmission rates in Ontario hospitals.  JAMA. 2012;307(10):1037-1045.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Gershon  AS, Wang  C, Guan  J, Vasilevska-Ristovska  J, Cicutto  L, To  T.  Identifying individuals with physician diagnosed COPD in health administrative databases.  COPD. 2009;6(5):388-394.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Shah  BR, Lipscombe  LL.  Clinical diabetes research using data mining: a Canadian perspective.  Can J Diabetes. 2015;39(3):235-238.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Juurlink  D, Preyra  C, Croxford  R,  et al.  Canadian Institute for Health Information Discharge Abstract Database: A Validation Study. Toronto, ON: Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences; 2006.
22.
Tu  JV, Naylor  CD, Austin  P.  Temporal changes in the outcomes of acute myocardial infarction in Ontario, 1992-1996.  CMAJ. 1999;161(10):1257-1261.PubMedGoogle Scholar
23.
Jong  P, Gong  Y, Liu  PP, Austin  PC, Lee  DS, Tu  JV.  Care and outcomes of patients newly hospitalized for heart failure in the community treated by cardiologists compared with other specialists.  Circulation. 2003;108(2):184-191.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
24.
Tu  K, Mitiku  T, Lee  DS, Guo  H, Tu  JV.  Validation of physician billing and hospitalization data to identify patients with ischemic heart disease using data from the Electronic Medical Record Administrative data Linked Database (EMRALD).  Can J Cardiol. 2010;26(7):e225-e228.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
25.
Agabiti  N, Picciotto  S, Cesaroni  G,  et al; Italian Study Group on Inequalities in Health Care.  The influence of socioeconomic status on utilization and outcomes of elective total hip replacement: a multicity population-based longitudinal study.  Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(1):37-44.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Santaguida  PL, Hawker  GA, Hudak  PL,  et al.  Patient characteristics affecting the prognosis of total hip and knee joint arthroplasty: a systematic review.  Can J Surg. 2008;51(6):428-436.PubMedGoogle Scholar
27.
Kralj  B.  Measuring “Rurality” for Purposes of Health Care Planning: An Empirical Measure for Ontario. Toronto: Ontario Medical Association; 2005.
28.
Parsons LS. Reducing bias in a propensity score matched-pair sample using greedy matching techniques. http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi26/p214-26.pdf. Accessed October 18, 2018.
29.
Austin  PC.  Balance diagnostics for comparing the distribution of baseline covariates between treatment groups in propensity-score matched samples.  Stat Med. 2009;28(25):3083-3107.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Hospital  MG. About concurrent/overlapping surgery. 2016. http://www.massgeneral.org/overlapping-surgery/about.aspx. Accessed October 18, 2018.
31.
Leaper  DJ.  Traumatic and surgical wounds.  BMJ. 2006;332(7540):532-535.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
32.
Papadimitropoulos  EA, Coyte  PC, Josse  RG, Greenwood  CE.  Current and projected rates of hip fracture in Canada.  CMAJ. 1997;157(10):1357-1363.PubMedGoogle Scholar
33.
Simunovic  N, Devereaux  PJ, Sprague  S,  et al.  Effect of early surgery after hip fracture on mortality and complications: systematic review and meta-analysis.  CMAJ. 2010;182(15):1609-1616.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
34.
Bhandari  M, Sprague  S, Schemitsch  EH; International Hip Fracture Research Collaborative.  Resolving controversies in hip fracture care: the need for large collaborative trials in hip fractures.  J Orthop Trauma. 2009;23(6):479-484.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
35.
Lizaur-Utrilla  A, Martinez-Mendez  D, Collados-Maestre  I, Miralles-Muñoz  FA, Marco-Gomez  L, Lopez-Prats  FA.  Early surgery within 2 days for hip fracture is not reliable as healthcare quality indicator.  Injury. 2016;47(7):1530-1535.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
36.
Health Quality Ontario. Quality-Based Procedures: Clinical Handbook for Hip Fracture. http://www.hqontario.ca/evidence/publications-and-ohtac-recommendations/clinical-handbooks. 2013. Accessed October 18, 2017.
37.
Maradit Kremers  H, Larson  DR, Crowson  CS,  et al.  Prevalence of total hip and knee replacement in the United States.  J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97(17):1386-1397.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
38.
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Hospital Readmissions Reduction Program (HRRP). 2015. https://www.cms.gov/medicare/medicare-fee-for-service-payment/acuteinpatientpps/readmissions-reduction-program.html. Accessed October 18, 2017.
39.
Ravi  B, Croxford  R, Austin  PC,  et al.  The relation between total joint arthroplasty and risk for serious cardiovascular events in patients with moderate-severe osteoarthritis: propensity score matched landmark analysis.  BMJ. 2013;347:f6187.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
40.
Frood  J, Johnson  T.  Improving measures of hip fracture wait times: a focus on Ontario.  Healthc Q. 2010;13(4):16-18.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
41.
Redelmeier  DA, Thiruchelvam  D, Daneman  N.  Introducing a methodology for estimating duration of surgery in health services research.  J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61(9):882-889.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
If you are not a JN Learning subscriber, you can either:
Subscribe to JN Learning for one year
Buy this activity
jn-learning_Modal_LoginSubscribe_Purchase
If you are not a JN Learning subscriber, you can either:
Subscribe to JN Learning for one year
Buy this activity
jn-learning_Modal_LoginSubscribe_Purchase
With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right

Name Your Search

Save Search
With a personal account, you can:
  • Track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
jn-learning_Modal_SaveSearch_NoAccess_Purchase

Lookup An Activity

or

My Saved Searches

You currently have no searches saved.

With a personal account, you can:
  • Access free activities and track your credits
  • Personalize content alerts
  • Customize your interests
  • Fully personalize your learning experience
Education Center Collection Sign In Modal Right
Topics
State Requirements