Does peer-reviewed publication change the habits of surgeons?

BACKGROUND: From April 1994 to December 1995 a prospective randomized trial was conducted at our institution comparing outcomes of laparoscopic and open appendectomy. It demonstrated no significant advantage to laparoscopic appendectomy. Our current study evaluates whether surgeon's habits at our hospital have been influenced by our previously published study. METHODS: Charts were reviewed for patients who underwent appendectomy from August 1998 to December 1998. In addition, a formal survey was conducted of all staff surgeons to ascertain their procedure of choice for appendicitis, and the reasons for their preference. RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of the appendectomies were attempted laparoscopically. The median operative time was longer for laparoscopic appendectomy, and median hospital charges were higher. Survey results showed that most staff surgeons prefer laparoscopic appendectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite our own published paper supporting open appendectomy over laparoscopic appendectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy has become the standard of care at our institution for the treatment of appendicitis. (C) 2001 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.