scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Jeffrey Barkun

Bio: Jeffrey Barkun is an academic researcher from McGill University Health Centre. The author has contributed to research in topics: Liver transplantation & Transplantation. The author has an hindex of 42, co-authored 149 publications receiving 14118 citations. Previous affiliations of Jeffrey Barkun include McGill University & Halifax.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This 5-year evaluation provides strong evidence that the classification of complications is valid and applicable worldwide in many fields of surgery, and subjective, inaccurate, or confusing terms such as “minor or major” should be removed from the surgical literature.
Abstract: Background and Aims:The lack of consensus on how to define and grade adverse postoperative events has greatly hampered the evaluation of surgical procedures. A new classification of complications, initiated in 1992, was updated 5 years ago. It is based on the type of therapy needed to correct the co

7,537 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The Second International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resections (LLR) was held in Morioka, Japan, from October 4 to 6, 2014 to evaluate the current status of laparoscopic liver surgery and to provide recommendations to aid its future development.
Abstract: The use of laparoscopy for liver surgery is increasing rapidly. The Second International Consensus Conference on Laparoscopic Liver Resections (LLR) was held in Morioka, Japan, from October 4 to 6, 2014 to evaluate the current status of laparoscopic liver surgery and to provide recommendations to aid its future development. Seventeen questions were addressed. The first 7 questions focused on outcomes that reflect the benefits and risks of LLR. These questions were addressed using the Zurich-Danish consensus conference model in which the literature and expert opinion were weighed by a 9-member jury, who evaluated LLR outcomes using GRADE and a list of comparators. The jury also graded LLRs by the Balliol Classification of IDEAL. The jury concluded that MINOR LLRs had become standard practice (IDEAL 3) and that MAJOR liver resections were still innovative procedures in the exploration phase (IDEAL 2b). Continued cautious introduction of MAJOR LLRs was recommended. All of the evidence available for scrutiny was of LOW quality by GRADE, which prompted the recommendation for higher quality evaluative studies. The last 10 questions focused on technical questions and the recommendations were based on literature review and expert panel opinion. Recommendations were made regarding preoperative evaluation, bleeding controls, transection methods, anatomic approaches, and equipment. Both experts and jury recognized the need for a formal structure of education for those interested in performing major laparoscopic LLR because of the steep learning curve.

1,064 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The CCI summarizes all postoperative complications and is more sensitive than existing morbidity endpoints and may serve as a standardized and widely applicable primary endpoint in surgical trials and other interventional fields of medicine.
Abstract: Objective:To develop and validate a comprehensive complication index (CCI) that integrates all events with their respective severity.Background:Reporting of surgical complications is inconsistent and often incomplete. Most studies fail to provide information about the severity of complications, or i

1,024 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors developed a series of structured tasks to objectively measure laparoscopic skills and used a linear regression model to test for the effects of level of training and practice on performance.
Abstract: Background: Interest in the training and evaluation of laparoscopic skills is extending beyond the realm of the operating room to the use of laparoscopic simulators. The purpose of this study was to develop a series of structured tasks to objectively measure laparoscopic skills. This model was then used to test for the effects of level of training and practice on performance. Methods: Forty-two subjects (6 each of surgical residents PGY1 to PGY5, 6 surgeons who practice laparoscopy and 6 who do not) were evaluated. Each subject viewed a 20-minute introductory video, then was tested performing 7 laparoscopic tasks (peg transfers, pattern cutting, clip and divide, endolooping, mesh placement and fixation, suturing with intracorporeal or extracorporeal knots). Performance was measured using a scoring system rewarding precision and speed. Each candidate repeated all 7 tasks and was rescored. Data were analyzed by linear regression to assess the relationship of performance with level of residency training for each task, and by ANOVA with repeated measures to test for effects of level of training, of repetition, and of the interaction between level of training and repetition on overall performance. Student's t test was used to evaluate differences between laparoscopic and nonlaparoscopic surgeons and between each of these groups and the PGY 5 level of surgical residents. Results: Significant predictors of overall performance were (a) level of training ( P = 0.002), (b) repetition ( P P = 0.001). There was also a significant interaction between level of training and the specific task on performance scores ( P = 0.006). When each task was evaluated individually for the 30 residents, 4 of the 7 tasks (tasks 1, 2, 6, 7) showed significant correlation between PGY level and score. A significant difference in performance scores between laparoscopic and nonlaparoscopic surgeons was seen for tasks 1, 2, and 6. Conclusions: A model was developed to evaluate laparoscopic skills. Construct validity was demonstrated by measuring significant improvement in performance with increasing residency training, and with practice. Further validation will require correlation of performance in the model with skill in vivo.

606 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: A five-stage paradigm is proposed to describe the development of innovative surgical procedures so that introduction and adoption of surgical innovations can derive from evidence-based principles rather than trial and error.

508 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The new complication classification appears reliable and may represent a compelling tool for quality assessment in surgery in all parts of the world.
Abstract: Growing demand for health care, rising costs, constrained resources, and evidence of variations in clinical practice have triggered interest in measuring and improving the quality of health care delivery. For a valuable quality assessment, relevant data on outcome must be obtained in a standardized and reproducible manner to allow comparison among different centers, between different therapies and within a center over time.1–3 Objective and reliable outcome data are increasingly requested by patients and payers (government or private insurance) to assess quality and costs of health care. Moreover, health policy makers point out that the availability of comparative data on individual hospital's and physician's performance represents a powerful market force, which may contribute to limit the costs of health care while improving quality.4 Conclusive assessments of surgical procedures remain limited by the lack of consensus on how to define complications and to stratify them by severity.1,5–8 In 1992, we proposed general principles to classify complications of surgery based on a therapy-oriented, 4-level severity grading.1 Subsequently, the severity grading was refined and applied to compare the results of laparoscopic versus open cholecystectomy9 and liver transplantation.10 This classification has also been used by others11–13 and was recently suggested to serve as the basis to assess the outcome of living related liver transplantation in the United States (J. Trotter, personal communication). However, the classification system has not yet been widely used in the surgical literature. The strength of the previous classification relied on the principle of grading complications based on the therapy used to treat the complication. This approach allows identification of most complications and prevents down-rating of major negative outcomes. This is particularly important in retrospective analyses. However, we felt that modifications were necessary, particularly in grading life-threatening complications and long-term disability due to a complication. We also felt that the duration of the hospital stay can no longer be used as a criterion to grade complications. Although definitions of negative outcomes rely to a large extend on subjective “value” appraisals, the grading system must be tested in a large cohort of patients. Finally, a classification is useful only if widely accepted and applied throughout different countries and surgical cultures. Such a validation was not done with the previous classification. Therefore, the aim of the current study was 3-fold: first, to propose an improved classification of surgical complications based on our experience gained with the previous classification1; second, to test this classification in a large cohort of patients who underwent general surgery; and third, to assess the reproducibility and acceptability of the classification through an international survey.

23,435 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The following Clinical Practice Guidelines will give up-to-date advice for the clinical management of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, as well as providing an in-depth review of all the relevant data leading to the conclusions herein.

7,851 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This 5-year evaluation provides strong evidence that the classification of complications is valid and applicable worldwide in many fields of surgery, and subjective, inaccurate, or confusing terms such as “minor or major” should be removed from the surgical literature.
Abstract: Background and Aims:The lack of consensus on how to define and grade adverse postoperative events has greatly hampered the evaluation of surgical procedures. A new classification of complications, initiated in 1992, was updated 5 years ago. It is based on the type of therapy needed to correct the co

7,537 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: While research in this field needs improvement in terms of rigor and quality, high-fidelity medical simulations are educationally effective and simulation-based education complements medical education in patient care settings.
Abstract: SUMMARY Review date: 1969 to 2003, 34 years. Background and context: Simulations are now in widespread use in medical education and medical personnel evaluation. Outcomes research on the use and effectiveness of simulation technology in medical education is scattered, inconsistent and varies widely in methodological rigor and substantive focus. Objectives: Review and synthesize existing evidence in educational science that addresses the question, ‘What are the features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to most effective learning?’. Search strategy: The search covered five literature databases (ERIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Timelit) and employed 91 single search terms and concepts and their Boolean combinations. Hand searching, Internet searches and attention to the ‘grey literature’ were also used. The aim was to perform the most thorough literature search possible of peer-reviewed publications and reports in the unpublished literature that have been judged for academic quality. Inclusion and exclusion criteria: Four screening criteria were used to reduce the initial pool of 670 journal articles to a focused set of 109 studies: (a) elimination of review articles in favor of empirical studies; (b) use of a simulator as an educational assessment or intervention with learner outcomes measured quantitatively; (c) comparative research, either experimental or quasi-experimental; and (d) research that involves simulation as an educational intervention. Data extraction: Data were extracted systematically from the 109 eligible journal articles by independent coders. Each coder used a standardized data extraction protocol. Data synthesis: Qualitative data synthesis and tabular presentation of research methods and outcomes were used. Heterogeneity of research designs, educational interventions, outcome measures and timeframe precluded data synthesis using meta-analysis. Headline results: Coding accuracy for features of the journal articles is high. The extant quality of the published research is generally weak. The weight of the best available evidence suggests that high-fidelity medical simulations facilitate learning under the right conditions. These include the following:

3,176 citations