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 op en appendectomy. It demonstrated no significant advantage to laparoscopic a ppendectomy. Our current study evaluates whether surgeon's habits at our ho spital 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 laparosc opically. The median operative time was longer for laparoscopic appendectom y, 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 o ver laparoscopic appendectomy, laparoscopic appendectomy has become the sta ndard of care at our institution for the treatment of appendicitis. (C) 200 1 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.