Hashmi, Zain G.

The rapid adoption of telemedicine has transformed healthcare delivery in the US, enhancing access and communication for surgical patients across wide geographic areas. However, a critical challenge persists: the need to define and standardize quality metrics specifically for telemedicine in surgery. Existing studies suggest that telemedicine can yield equivalent or improved outcomes compared with in-person visits. Nevertheless, literature remains limited in evaluating patient satisfaction, cost-effectiveness, and diagnostic accuracy. Through expert consensus within the American College of Surgeons Board of Governors Telehealth Pillar, we propose a structured framework for defining and implementing quality metrics for surgical telemedicine. This is based on the Donabedian model, addressing structure, process, and outcome, while also considering the distinct phases of surgical care: preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative. This framework identifies unique domains of telemedicine in surgical care, emphasizing hospital and organizational structure, patient and provider readiness, and policy alignment. A comparative analysis with existing AHRQ and WHO frameworks highlights gaps in surgical applicability. Finally, we propose an implementation roadmap prioritizing immediate, feasible metrics while identifying areas for future validation. Collaboration among researchers, clinicians, and policymakers will be essential to establish these metrics and ensure that telemedicine delivers on its potential to improve surgical care delivery while addressing disparities in access and outcomes.

Traumatic injury leading to arterial damage has traditionally been repaired using autologous vein graft from the contralateral limb. This often requires a secondary surgical site and the potential of prolonged operative time for patients. We sought to assess the use of ipsilateral vs contralateral vein grafts in patients who experienced traumatic extremity vascular injury. A multicenter database was queried to identify arterial injuries requiring operative intervention with vein grafting. The primary outcome of interest was need for operative reintervention. Secondary outcomes included risk of thrombosis, infection, and intensive care unit length of stay. 358 patients (320 contralateral and 38 ipsilateral) were included in the analysis. The ipsilateral vein cohort did not display a statistically significant decrease in need for reoperation when compared to the contralateral group (11% vs 23%; OR 0.41, 95% CI −0.07-1.3; P = .14). Contralateral repair was associated with longer median intensive care unit (ICU) LOS (4.3 vs 3.1 days; P < .01).