Breadcrumb

Thoracic Surgery Quality of Care Issues and Facility Leaders’ Response at the C.W. Bill Young VA Medical Center in Bay Pines, Florida

Report Information

Issue Date
Report Number
18-01321-56
VISN
8
State
Florida
District
VA Office
Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
Report Author
Office of Healthcare Inspections
Report Type
Hotline Healthcare Inspection
Report Topic
Patient Safety
Major Management Challenges
Healthcare Services
Leadership and Governance
Recommendations
10
Questioned Costs
$0
Better Use of Funds
$0
Congressionally Mandated
No

Summary

Summary
The VA Office of Inspector General (OIG) conducted a healthcare inspection at the facility to evaluate allegations related to a thoracic surgeon’s surgical complications including patient deaths and misrepresentations of operative note documentation and the facility’s inappropriate reporting of the thoracic surgeon’s complication rate. The surgeon, board certified in thoracic and cardiac surgery, began clinical practice in 2009, started working at the facility in 2013 as a staff thoracic surgeon, and was selected to become Chief of Surgery in July 2014. On November 9, 2017, the OIG received a complaint about the surgeon’s competency and quality of care in five patient cases. The OIG consulted with a non-VA thoracic surgeon, who reviewed the care of the five patients as well as 19 patient cases from a previous OIG evaluation. The non-VA consultant identified quality of care concerns with 16 of the 24 patient cases. The facility completed external management reviews and found five cases of concern. In February 2019, the surgeon was reassigned to a nonclinical care setting. Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and Veterans Integrated Service Network leaders established a panel of VHA cardiothoracic surgeons who reviewed 22 of the 24 cases evaluated by the non-VA consultant as well as other, additional cases. In December 2019, the panel determined that the surgeon delivered thoracic surgical care within quality expectations and the surgeon resumed patient care. The OIG did not substantiate that the facility failed to appropriately report surgical errors and complications. The OIG made five recommendations to the Under Secretary for Health related to a thoracic specialty leader, operative documentation, the National Surgery Office’s surgery assessments, and peer review processes. The OIG made an additional five recommendations to the Facility Director related to operative documentation, professional communications, Surgical Work Group oversight, privileging, and institutional disclosures.

Open Recommendation Image, SquareOpenClosed and Implemented Recommendation Image, CheckmarkClosed-ImplementedNot Implemented Recommendation Image, X character'Closed-Not Implemented
No. 1
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The Under Secretary for Health designates a thoracic specialty leader who has the authority to review all aspects of the personnel and management actions and can provide unbiased, authoritative, and timely guidance to facilities on the most clinically sound course of action when a thoracic surgeon’s practice or outcomes are under review, in order to ensure that VA provides high quality care.
No. 2
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The Under Secretary for Health outlines general parameters and triggers for when facilities without local thoracic surgery expertise engage the thoracic specialty leader and how the thoracic specialty leader’s decisions and guidance will be documented.
No. 3
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The Under Secretary for Health clarifies Veterans Health Administration policy regarding providers’ responsibilities to document complications in operative reports.
No. 4
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The Under Secretary for Health reevaluates the eligible and mandatory assessment surgery cases reported to the National Surgery Office to determine if thoracic cases should be included in the list of mandatory assessment cases, and modifies the list as appropriate.
No. 5
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The Under Secretary for Health defines expectations for peer review committee members whose cases are being reviewed to leave the room during those deliberations, provides guidance on how that recusal is to be annotated in the Peer Review Committee minutes, and updates Veterans Health Administration policy, as needed.
No. 6
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The C.W. Bill Young VA Medical Center Director enhances processes to identify the existence of omissions or misrepresentations in operative note documentation and takes action based on identified deficiencies, if any.
No. 7
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The C.W. Bill Young VA Medical Center Director takes action to ensure that the surgeon is aware of, and complies with, expectations for professional communications and supporting staff to report adverse events and close calls.
No. 8
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The C.W. Bill Young VA Medical Center Director ensures the C.W. Bill Young VA Medical Center Surgical Work Group provides oversight as required by Veterans Health Administration policy and monitors for compliance.
No. 9
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The C.W. Bill Young VA Medical Center Director confirms processes are in place to ensure providers’ clinical privileges are specific to the facility and service, and are based on each provider’s clinical competence, and monitors for compliance.
No. 10
Closed and Implemented Recommendation Image, Checkmark
to Veterans Health Administration (VHA)
The C.W. Bill Young VA Medical Center Director reviews whether the cases reflected in tables 1 and 2 in this report meet criteria for institutional disclosure and takes action as appropriate.