Simplified risk-prediction for benchmarking and quality improvement in emergency general surgery. Prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study
- PMID: 34785344
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.106168
Simplified risk-prediction for benchmarking and quality improvement in emergency general surgery. Prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study
Abstract
Background and aims: Emergency General Surgery (EGS) conditions account for millions of deaths worldwide, yet it is practiced without benchmarking-based quality improvement programs. The aim of this observational, prospective, multicenter, nationwide study was to determine the best benchmark cutoff points in EGS, as a reference to guide improvement measures.
Methods: Over a 6-month period, 38 centers (5% of all public hospitals) attending EGS patients on a 24-h, 7-days a week basis, enrolled consecutive patients requiring an emergent/urgent surgical procedure. Patients were stratified into cohorts of low (i.e., expected morbidity risk <33%), middle and high risk using the novel m-LUCENTUM calculator.
Results: A total of 7258 patients were included; age (mean ± SD) was 51.1 ± 21.5 years, 43.2% were female. Benchmark cutoffs in the low-risk cohort (5639 patients, 77.7% of total) were: use of laparoscopy ≥40.9%, length of hospital stays ≤3 days, any complication within 30 days ≤ 17.7%, and 30-day mortality ≤1.1%. The variables with the greatest impact were septicemia on length of hospital stay (21 days; adjusted beta coefficient 16.8; 95% CI: 15.3 to 18.3; P < .001), and respiratory failure on mortality (risk-adjusted population attributable fraction 44.6%, 95% CI 29.6 to 59.6, P < .001). Use of laparoscopy (odds ratio 0.764, 95% CI 0.678 to 0.861; P < .001), and intraoperative blood loss (101-500 mL: odds ratio 2.699, 95% CI 2.152 to 3.380; P < .001; and 500-1000 mL: odds ratio 2.875, 95% CI 1.403 to 5.858; P = .013) were associated with increased morbidity.
Conclusions: This study offers, for the first time, clinically-based benchmark values in EGS and identifies measures for improvement.
Keywords: Benchmarking; Emergency general surgery; Quality improvement; Risk-prediction.
Copyright © 2021 IJS Publishing Group Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
A commentary on "Simplified risk-prediction for benchmarking and quality improvement in emergency general surgery. Prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study" (Int J Surg 2022; 97:106168).Int J Surg. 2022 Feb;98:106235. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2022.106235. Epub 2022 Jan 29. Int J Surg. 2022. PMID: 35093597 No abstract available.
References
-
- Stewart B, Khanduri P, McCord C, et al. Global disease burden of conditions requiring emergency surgery. Br. J. Surg . 2014;101(1):9-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9329 .
-
- Hernandez MC, Madbak F, Parikh K, Crandall M. GI surgical emergencies: scope and burden of disease. J. Gastrointest. Surg . 2019;23(4):827-836. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11605-018-3992-6 .
-
- Ettorchi -Tardy A, Levif M, Michel P. Benchmarking: a method for continuous quality improvement in health. Healthc. Policy . 2012;7(4):101-119. http://dx.doi.org/10.12927/hcpol.2012.22872 .
-
- Shah AA, Haider AH, Zogg CK, et al. National estimates of predictors of outcomes for emergency general surgery. J. Trauma Acute Care Surg . 2015;78(3):482-491. http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000000555 .
-
- Lyu HG, Najjar P, Havens JM. Past, present, and future of emergency general surgery in the USA. Acute Med. Surg . 2018;5(2):119-122. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ams2.327 .
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical