Exploration of Factors Associated With Surgeon Deviation From Practice Guidelines for Management of Inguinal Hernias

Abstract

Importance: Despite availability of evidence-based guidelines for surgery, many patients receive guideline-discordant care. Reasons for this are largely unknown. For example, evidence-based guidelines recommend a minimally invasive approach for persons with bilateral or recurrent unilateral inguinal hernias. Benefits are also noted for primary unilateral inguinal hernia. However, findings from previous quantitative research indicate that only 26% of patients receive this treatment and only 42% of surgeons offer a minimally invasive approach, even for recurrent or bilateral hernias.

Objective: To explore factors associated with surgeon choice of approach (minimally invasive vs open) in inguinal hernia repair as a tool to gain an understanding of guideline-discordant care.

Design, setting, and participants: Qualitative study performed as part of a larger explanatory sequential mixed methods design. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 21 practicing surgeons from a large statewide quality collaborative who were diverse with regard to practice type, geographic location, and surgical specialty. Qualitative interviews consisted of a clinical vignette, followed by semi-structured interview questions. Through thematic analysis using qualitive data analysis software, patterns within the data were located, analyzed, and identified. All data were collected between April 24 and July 31, 2018.

Exposure: Clinical vignette as part of the qualitative interviews.

Main outcomes and measures: Capture of surgical approaches and factors motivating decision-making for inguinal hernia repair.

Results: Of the 21 participating surgeons, 17 (81%) were men, 18 (86%) were White, and all were 35 years of age or older. Data revealed 3 dominant themes: surgeon preference and autonomy (eg, favoring one approach over the other), access and resources (eg, availability of robot), and patient characteristics (eg, age, comorbidities).

Conclusions and relevance: Decision-making for the approach to inguinal hernia repair is largely influenced by surgeon preference and access to resources rather than patient factors. Although a one-size-fits-all approach is not recommended, the operative approach should ideally be informed by patient factors, including hernia characteristics. Addressing surgeon preference and available resources with a clinician-facing decision aid may provide an opportunity to optimize care for patients undergoing inguinal hernia repair.