Skip to content
Implementation Science at UW

Keywords: Christopher R. Burke

✪ A formative mixed methods evaluation of a new Ross program: Why context matters

Authors:

Kyle S. Bilodeau, Frank F. Yang, Michael Shang, Audrey Mossman, David C. Mauchley, Scott DeRoo, & Christopher R. Burke

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: May 2024

Read the full text in the open access journal The Cardiothoracic Surgeon

Abstract:

Background

The Ross procedure is a technically complex operation to address the pathology of the aortic valve. Prior attempts at widespread implementation have been plagued with variations in effectiveness. We report our initial programmatic outcomes using dissemination and implementation (D&I) science frameworks, with an aim to define both programmatic efficacy and effectiveness. The study design was a single center, explanatory sequential mixed methods evaluation of a Ross surgery program from June 2020 to April 2023. Quantitative measures for baseline patient characteristics and postoperative outcomes were summarized. Qualitative measures were obtained using semi-structured interviews and characterized using implementation science frameworks.

Results

A total of 71 patients underwent the Ross procedure at a single academic center. Mean age was 40 years (± 13). There were no perioperative deaths or valve-related reinterventions (0%). During the follow-up period, 2 (2.8%) patients required re-operation and 2 (2.8%) required balloon dilation of the pulmonary homograft. Qualitative measures noted communication and prospective self-audit facilitated measures of effectiveness, as dichotomy within expected vs. observed outcomes led to program modifications. Collaboration across hospital systems promoted adoption and implementation, which led to the incorporation of the Ross procedure into accepted organizational practice.

Conclusions

In this formative evaluation, limited-efficacy outcomes demonstrated similar programmatic success to data from other established centers. With the prerequisite center volume and case selection, the Ross procedure is a safe and efficacious treatment for aortic valvular disease. Implementation science can be used both in real-time and retrospectively to guide organizational efforts to improve outcomes and to improve the translation of results across centers.

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**

✪ Dissemination and implementation analysis of the Ross procedure in adults: Time to update the guidelines?

Authors:

Kyle S. Bilodeau, David C. Mauchley, Scott DeRoo & Christopher R. Burke

University of Washington affiliated authors are displayed in bold.

✪ Open Access

Published: December 2023

Read the full text in the open access journal The cardiothoracic surgeon

Abstract:

Background

The science of dissemination and implementation (D&I) aims to improve the quality and effectiveness of care by addressing the challenges of incorporating research and evidence-based practice into routine clinical practice. This lens of D&I has challenged the interpretation and incorporation of data, noting that failure of a given therapy may not reflect lack of efficacy, but instead reflect an imperfect implementation. The aim of this manuscript is to review the influence of the Ross procedure’s historical context on its D&I.

Method

A contextual baseline of the Ross procedure was defined from the procedure’s original description in the literature to major publications since the 2017 valvular heart disease guidelines. D&I evaluation was conducted using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR), using constructs from each of the five respective domains to define the main determinants.

Results

Each of the five CFIR domains appears to be correlated with a factor influencing the Ross procedure’s varied history of enthusiasm and acceptance. The complex nature of Ross required adaptation for optimization, with a strong correlation of center volume on outcomes that were not considered in non-contemporary studies. Outcomes later published from those studies influenced social and cultural contexts within the aortic surgery community, and led to further organizational uncertainty, resulting in slow guideline incorporation.

Conclusion

The D&I of the Ross procedure was a result of inadequate appreciation of technical complexity, effect of patient selection, and complex aortic surgery experience, resulting in dismissal of an efficacious procedure due to a misunderstanding of effectiveness

**This abstract is posted with permission under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License**