Variability in Reoperation Rates at 182 Hospitals: A Potential Target for Quality Improvement

Outcomes Following Colorectal Cancer Surgeries at the Basildon and Thurrock University Hospital

Aim We reviewed surgical outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer resections in Basildon and Thurrock University Hospital between April 2019 and March 2020. Methods Clinical characteristics of 141 patients who underwent surgical resection for colorectal cancer at the district hospital were assessed and reported, including tumor site, disease stage, and type of surgical resection performed. We reviewed 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality, postoperative complications, return to the theater, and extended hospital stay data for these patients. The results of our review across measured outcomes were compared to the national average from the National Bowel Cancer Audit (NBOCA) Report. Results Clinical data and health outcomes for 141 patients with colorectal cancer resections within the index year were reviewed. The mean age at diagnosis was 68.9 (12.5) years. Among the patients, 61 (43.3%) were female, and 59 (41.8%) had Stage III and IV colorectal cancer. Around 95 (67.4%) had the colon as the primary tumor site, while 46 (32.6%) had the primary tumor site in the rectum. Of the patients, 17 (12.1%) had emergency surgeries, and 124 (87.9%) underwent laparoscopic surgery. Right hemicolectomy was the most common operation performed in 58 patients (41.1%). The average length of stay was 7.8 (6.6) days; the length of stay was similar for both colonic and rectal resections. Low 30-day and 90-day mortality rates of (1/141) 0.71% and (2/141) 1.4%, respectively, were observed compared to the 90-day United Kingdom (UK) national average mortality rate of 2.7% in 2019/20. Around 30 (21.3%) of the patients developed postoperative complications within 30 days of surgery. Only six out of 30 postoperative complications were classified as Clavien-Dindo Grade III. Conclusion Surgical outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer in our district general hospital are similar to or lower than the national averages estimated by NBOCA. To further strengthen surgical care delivery and improve patient outcomes in the United Kingdom, there is a need to improve surgical techniques and quality improvement processes.

Quality indicators in surgical oncology: systematic review of measures used to compare quality across hospitals

BACKGROUND

Measurement and reporting of quality indicators at the hospital level has been shown to improve outcomes and support patient choice. Although there are many studies validating individual quality indicators, there has been no systematic approach to understanding what quality indicators exist for surgical oncology and no standardization for their use. The aim of this study was to review quality indicators used to assess variation in quality in surgical oncology care across hospitals or regions. It also sought to describe the aims of these studies and what, if any, feedback was offered to the analysed groups.

METHODS

A literature search was performed to identify studies published between 1 January 2000 and 23 October 2023 that applied surgical quality indicators to detect variation in cancer care at the hospital or regional level.

RESULTS

A total of 89 studies assessed 91 unique quality indicators that fell into the following Donabedian domains: process indicators (58; 64%); outcome indicators (26; 29%); structure indicators (6; 7%); and structure and outcome indicators (1; 1%). Purposes of evaluating variation included: identifying outliers (43; 48%); comparing centres with a benchmark (14; 16%); and supplying evidence of practice variation (29; 33%). Only 23 studies (26%) reported providing the results of their analyses back to those supplying data.

CONCLUSION

Comparisons of quality in surgical oncology within and among hospitals and regions have been undertaken in high-income countries. Quality indicators tended to be process measures and reporting focused on identifying outlying hospitals. Few studies offered feedback to data suppliers.

Risk factors for reoperation within 30 days in laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery: A Japanese multicenter study

INTRODUCTION

Thirty-day reoperation rate reflects short-term surgical outcomes following surgery. Laparoscopic surgery for colorectal cancer reportedly has positive effects on postoperative complications. This retrospective study investigated risk factors for 30-day reoperation rate among patients after laparoscopic colorectal cancer surgery using a multicenter database.

METHODS

Participants comprised 3037 patients who had undergone laparoscopic resection of colorectal cancer between April 2016 and December 2022 at the Nagasaki University and six affiliated centers, classified into those who had undergone reoperation within 30 days after surgery (RO group; n = 88) and those who had not (NRO group; n = 2949). Clinicopathological characteristics were compared between groups.

RESULTS

In the RO group, anastomotic leakage occurred in 57 patients (64.8%), intestinal obstruction in 12 (13.6%), and intraabdominal abscess in 5 (5.7%). Female patients were more frequent, preoperative treatment less frequent, body mass index (BMI) lower, operation time longer, blood loss greater, and hospital stay longer in the RO group (p < .05 each). Multivariate analysis revealed BMI (odds ratio, 0.415; 95% confidence interval, 0.218-0.787; p = .021) and poor performance status (odds ratio, 1.966; 95% confidence interval, 1.106-3.492; p = .021) as independent predictors of reoperation.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative measures are warranted for patients with low BMI and poor performance status undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery.

Impact of atherosclerosis on the postoperative complications of colorectal surgery in older patients with colorectal cancer

BACKGROUND

Atherosclerosis is associated with various comorbidities; nonetheless, its effect on the postoperative complications of colorectal surgery in older patients with colorectal cancer (CRC) remains unclear. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of atherosclerosis on the postoperative complications of colorectal surgery in older adults with CRC.

METHODS

Patients aged ≥ 65 years who underwent surgery for CRC between April 2017 and October 2020 were enrolled. To evaluate atherosclerosis, we prospectively calculated the cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) measured by the blood pressure/pulse wave test and abdominal aortic calcification (AAC) score from computed tomography. Risk factors for Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III postoperative complications were evaluated by univariate and logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 124 patients were included. The mean CAVI value and AAC score were 9.5 ± 1.8 and 7.0 ± 8.0, respectively. Clavien-Dindo grade ≥ III postoperative complications were observed in 14 patients (11.3%). CAVI (odds ratio, 1.522 [95% confidence interval, 1.073-2.160], p = 0.019), AAC score (1.083 [1.009-1.163], p = 0.026); and operative time (1.007 [1.003-1.012], p = 0.001) were identified as risk factors for postoperative complications. Based on the optimal cut-off values of CAVI and AAC score, the probability of postoperative complications was 27.8% in patients with abnormal values for both parameters, which was 17.4 times higher than the 1.6% probability of postoperative complications in patients with normal values.

CONCLUSIONS

Atherosclerosis, particularly that assessed using CAVI and AAC score, could be a significant predictor of postoperative complications of colorectal surgery in older adults with CRC.

Building staff capability, opportunity, and motivation to provide smoking cessation to people with cancer in Australian cancer treatment centres: development of an implementation intervention framework for the Care to Quit cluster randomised controlled trial

Few rigorous studies provide a clear description of the methodological approach of developing an evidence-based implementation intervention, prior to implementation at scale. This study describes the development, mapping, rating, and review of the implementation strategies for the Care to Quit smoking cessation trial, prior to application in nine cancer services across Australia. Key stakeholders were engaged in the process from conception through to rating, reviewing and refinement of strategies and principles. An initial scoping review identified 21 barriers to provision of evidence-based smoking cessation care to patients with cancer, which were mapped to the Theoretical Domains Framework and Behaviour Change Wheel (BCW) to identify relevant intervention functions. The mapping identified 26 relevant behaviour change techniques, summarised into 11 implementation strategies. The implementation strategies were rated and reviewed against the BCW Affordability, Practicality, Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side-effects/safety, and Equity criteria by key stakeholders during two interactive workshops to facilitate a focus on feasible interventions likely to resonate with clinical staff. The implementation strategies and associated intervention tools were then collated by form and function to provide a practical guide for implementing the intervention. This study illustrates the rigorous use of theories and frameworks to arrive at a practical intervention guide, with potential to inform future replication and scalability of evidence-based implementation across a range of health service settings.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10742-022-00288-6.

Analysis of neurosurgical procedures with unplanned reoperation for quality improvement: A 5-year single hospital study

The unplanned return to the operating room rate is a quality metric for assessing hospital performance. This study aimed to evaluate the cause, incidence, and time interval of unplanned returns in index neurosurgical procedures within 30 days of the initial surgery as an internal audit. We retrospectively analyzed neurosurgical procedures between January 2015, and December 2019, in a single regional hospital. The definition of an unplanned return to the operating room was a patient who underwent two operations within 30 days when the second procedure was not planned, staged, or related to the natural course of the disease.A total of 4365 patients were identified in our analysis, of which 93 (2%) had an unplanned return to the operating room within 30 days of their initial surgery during admission. The most common reason for an unplanned return to the operating room for a cranial procedure was hemorrhage, followed by hydrocephalus and subdural effusion, which accounted for 49.5%(46/93), 12%(11/93), and 5.4%(5/93) of cases, respectively. In spinal procedures, the most common cause of return was a residual disc, followed by surgical site infection, which accounted for 5.4%(5/93) and 4.3%(4/93) of cases, respectively. The overall median time interval for unplanned returns to the operating room was 3 days (interquartile range, 1-9).Lowering the rate of postoperative hemorrhage in cranial surgery and postoperative residual disc in spine surgery was crucial as an internal audit in a 5-year single institute follow-up. However, the unplanned reoperation rate is less helpful in benchmarking because of the heterogeneity of patients between hospitals.

Risk factors for unplanned return to the operating room within 24 hours: A 9-year single-center observational study

The purpose of the retrospective case-control study was to identify the causes of and risk factors for unplanned return to the operating room (uROR) within 24 hours in surgical patients.We examined 275 cases of 24-hour uROR in our hospital from January 2010 to December 2018. The reasons for 24-hour uROR were classified into several categories. Controls were randomly matched to cases in a 1:1 ratio with the selection criteria set for the same surgeon and operation code in the same corresponding year.The mortality rate was significantly higher in patients with 24-hour uROR (11.63% vs 5.23%). Bleeding was the most common etiology (172/275; 62.55%) and technical error (14.5%) also contributed to 24-hour uROR. The clinical factors that led to bleeding included a history of liver disease (P = .032), smoking (P = .002), low platelet count in preoperative screening (P = .012), and preoperative administration of antiplatelet or anticoagulant agents (P = .014).Clinicians should recognize the risk factors for bleeding and minimize errors to avoid the increase in patient morbidity and mortality that is associated with 24-hour uROR.Level of Evidence: Level IV.

Time to Unplanned Return to the Operating Room and Associated Risk Factors in Patients With Surgical Retinal Detachment Repair

PURPOSE

To assess the incidence of unplanned return to the operating room (ROR) at ≤45 days or ≥46 days after primary retinal detachment (RD) surgery and correlate ROR with preoperative risk factors and visual outcomes.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of patients with primary RD surgery to assess for unplanned ROR between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2014, with follow-up of 90 days to 8 years (mean, 1.5 years). We assessed 268 patients receiving 270 primary rhegmatogenous RD surgeries between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2014 in an academic tertiary referral center.

RESULTS

Of the 270 RD surgeries, 82 were complicated (history of proliferative vitreoretinopathy or trauma-related RDs at presentation) and 188 were uncomplicated (RD unrelated to trauma or proliferative vitreoretinopathy at presentation). The ROR rate for all surgeries was 12.2% (33/270) over the follow-up period, with 51.5% (17/33) having reoperations within 45 days. The complicated detachment group had a ROR rate of 14.6% (12/82) over the follow-up period, and 50% of those (6/12) had reoperations within 45 days. The uncomplicated detachment group had a ROR rate of 11.2% (21/188) over the follow-up period. Of those, 52.4% (11/21) had reoperations within 45 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Given that only 51.5% of all RORs occurred within 45 days, a 45-day ROR surgical quality metric that has been previously used may be of limited value for RD surgery. Factors such as age at presentation, number of retinal breaks, number of detached clock hours, use of silicone oil tamponade for pars plana vitrectomy, history of choroidal detachment, high myopia, ocular trauma, and open globe were associated with increasing risk of ROR. Implementing risk-adjusted metrics may provide a more accurate and useful quality improvement metric for evaluating quality of surgical care in vitreoretinal surgery. Am J Ophthalmol 2021;221:•••-•••. © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Indications and Outcome of Patients who had Re-Laparotomy: Two Years' Experience from a Teaching Hospital in a Developing Nation

Background

Complications from abdominal surgery may necessitate a second or more surgeries, re-laparotomy. It is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Data on relaparotomy from the developing nations is limited. This study aims to assess the indications and outcome of patients who had relaparotomy.

Methods

A retrospective review of medical records of all patients who underwent Re-laparotomy at St. Paul's Hospital Millennium Medical College from January 2016 to December 2017 was done.

Result

Of 2146 laparotomies, 6.9% (149) needed re-laparotomy and 129 patients were analyzed. Most (123,95.3%) had on-demand re-laparotomy. Patients operated on emergency made 70.5% (91) of the cases making the ratio of emergency to elective surgery 2.4:1. The three most common surgeries that needed re-laparotomy were, Perforated appendicitis (35,27.1%), bowel obstructions (28,21.7%) , and trauma (20,13.4%). The most common indications for relaparotomy were intra-abdominal abscess (57,44.23%), wound dehiscence (17,13.2%) and anastomotic leak (15 ,11.6%). Surgical site infection (128,100%) and malnutrition (58,45%) were the leading complications. The overall mortality rate was 12.8 % (19). There was no statically significant difference in mortality rate between on-demand and planned re-laparotomy (P=0.388), urgency of the primary surgery (P=0.891) and the number of relaparotomy (p=0.629). Re-laparotomy for anastomotic leak (p=0.001) and patients above fifty years of age (P=0.015) had significant associations with mortality.

Conclusion

Intra-abdominal abscess collection, wound dehiscence and anastomotic leak were the most common indications of re-laparotomies. Age above fifty years and anastomotic leaks were significantly associated with mortality.

Risk factors of postoperative spinal epidural hematoma after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion surgery

OBJECT

To assess the incidence and analyze the risk factors of postoperative spinal epidural hematoma (SEH) after transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) surgery, in order to provide a solution for reducing the occurrence of postoperative SEH after TLIF.

METHODS

A total of 3717 patients who were performed TLIF surgery in the Orthopedics department of our hospital from January 2010 to March 2020 were included. Patients who had reoperations due to postoperative SEH were selected as the SEH group. The control group was randomly selected from patients without reoperations with the ratio of 3:1 compared to the SEH group. The basic information, preoperative examination and surgical information of the patients were collected through the hospital medical record system, and the statistics were processed through SPSS 22.0 software.

RESULTS

(1) Among the 3717 patients who underwent TLIF surgery in our hospital in the past 10 years, 46 had secondary surgeries, with a total incidence of 1.24%. 12 cases had secondary surgeries due to postoperative SEH, with an incidence of 0.35%. (2) Univariate analysis identified eight factors potentially associated with risk for postoperative SEH, including older age, longer thrombin time (TT), higher level of alkaline phosphatase (ALP), higher number of fusion segments, revision surgery, having received blood transfusion, using of more than one gelatin sponge or using of styptic powder in the surgery, longer operation time and more blood loss in the surgery (P<0.05). (3) On multivariate analysis, three factors were identified as independent risk factors, which include revision surgery (P=0.021, OR=7.667), longer TT (P=0.027, OR=2.586) and using of more than one gelatin sponge or using of styptic powder in the surgery (P=0.012, OR=9.000).

CONCLUSIONS

Revision surgery (P=0.021, OR=7.667), longer TT (P=0.027, OR=2.586) and using of more than one gelatin sponge or using of styptic powder in the surgery were independent risk factors for postoperative SEH after TLIF.

Care to Quit: a stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to implement best practice smoking cessation care in cancer centres

BACKGROUND

Cigarette smoking in people with cancer is associated with negative treatment-related outcomes including increased treatment toxicity and complications, medication side effects, decreased performance status and morbidity. Evidence-based smoking cessation care is not routinely provided to patients with cancer. The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of a smoking cessation implementation intervention on abstinence from smoking in people diagnosed with cancer.

METHODS

A stepped wedge cluster randomised design will be used. All sites begin in the control condition providing treatment as usual. In a randomly generated order, sites will move to the intervention condition. Based on the Theoretical Domains Framework, implementation of Care to Quit will include (i) building the capability and motivation of a critical mass of key clinical staff and identifying champions; and (ii) identifying and implementing cessation care models/pathways. Two thousand one hundred sixty patients with cancer (diagnosed in the prior six months), aged 18+, who report recent combustible tobacco use (past 90 days or in the 30 days prior to cancer diagnosis) and are accessing anti-cancer therapy, will be recruited at nine sites. Assessments will be conducted at baseline and 7-month follow-up. The primary outcome will be 6-month abstinence from smoking. Secondary outcomes include biochemical verification of abstinence from smoking, duration of quit attempts, tobacco consumption, nicotine dependence, provision and receipt of smoking cessation care, mental health and quality of life and cost effectiveness of the intervention.

DISCUSSION

This study will implement best practice smoking cessation care in cancer centres and has the potential for wide dissemination.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial is registered with ANZCTR (www.anzctr.org.au): ACTRN ( ACTRN12621000154808 ) prior to the accrual of the first participant and will be updated regularly as per registry guidelines.

Association between Postoperative Complications and Reoperation for Patients Undergoing Geriatric Surgery and the Effect of Reoperation on Mortality

Elderly patients have greater risk for postoperative adverse events (PAEs). The study examines the rates of reoperation, the association between PAEs and reoperation, and the effect of reoperation on mortality for patients 65 years of age or older undergoing colorectal resections (CRRs), pancreatic resections (PRs), and lower extremity bypass (LEB) in 2010 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. The models evaluating associations between reoperation and preoperative factors, PAEs, and mortality were developed using multiple logistic regression. The reoperation rates were 6.41 per cent for CRR (n = 11,084), 6.79 per cent for PR (n = 1,606), and 15.04 per cent for LEB (n = 4,170). Preoperative factors predicting reoperation included indications for surgery, procedure category, emergency status, and systemic sepsis. The PAEs most strongly associated with reoperation were wound dehiscence for CRR (odds ratio [OR], 15.286; 95% confidence interval [CI], 11.035 to 21.175) and for PR (OR, 19.656; 8.677 to 44.531) and for LEB, graft failure (OR, 28.151; 18.030 to 43.954) and organ space surgical site infection (OR, 15.753; 6.938 to 35.711). Higher rates of mortality occurred with reoperation for patients undergoing CRR (16.88 vs 5.45%, P < 0.0001), PR (28.44 vs 2.14%, P < 0.0001), and LEB (6.22 vs 3.05%, P < 0.0001). For elderly patients undergoing general and vascular surgery, reoperation occurs frequently, is strongly associated with other PAEs, and may elevate risk of mortality for this vulnerable population.

Do 30-Day Reoperation Rates Adequately Measure Quality in Orthopedic Surgery?

BACKGROUND

Unplanned reoperation rates represent an important metric in monitoring quality in orthopedic surgery. Previous studies have focused on 30-day reoperation rates, not accounting for complications that may arise beyond this time. This study aimed to understand the frequency, timing, and procedure type of orthopedic reoperations, as well as the complications leading up to these reoperations over a 1-year period.

METHODS

A single-center, retrospective cohort study reviewed all orthopedic surgeries performed within a three-year period and subsequently identified reoperations within a year following the initial case. Exclusion criteria for reoperations included those that were planned, involved a different body part, or had a different laterality from the first operation. The cases were analyzed by procedure type, timing of reoperation, and causes of reoperation.

RESULTS

Of the 10,449 orthopedic surgeries performed between 2012 and 2015, 947 (9.1%) were unplanned reoperations within 1 year. Most (775; 81.8%) unplanned reoperations occurred after 30 days. Infections/wound complications (58.2%) were the most common reason for unplanned reoperations at 1 month from the initial operation, and mechanical complications (49.5%) predominated at the 6-months-to-1-year time frame.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the current paradigm of focusing on reoperations occurring within 30 days of the initial operation captures only a fraction of unplanned reoperations. Stratification of this metric by time and precipitating complication type provides additional information that quality improvement programs may target. A 1-year unplanned reoperation rate could be used as a broad indicator of surgical quality across institutions.

Postoperative complications following colonic resection for cancer are associated with impaired long-term survival

AIM

Surgery for colorectal cancer is associated with a high incidence of postoperative complications. The aim of this study was to analyse whether postoperative complications following radical resection for colorectal cancer are associated with increased recurrence rate and impaired survival.

METHOD

Patients operated for colon cancer between 2007 and 2009 with curative intent were identified through the Swedish Colorectal Cancer Registry. The cohort was divided into three subgroups: patients who developed severe postoperative complications, patients who developed non-severe complications and patients who did not develop any complication (controls).

RESULTS

Of 6779 patients included in the study, 640 (9%) developed severe complications, 994 (15%) non-severe complications and 5145 (76%) had no complications. The 5-year overall survival rate was 60.3% in the severe complication group, 64.2% in the non-severe complication group and 72.8% in the control group (P < 0.01). The 3-year disease-free survival rate was 66.8%, 70.9% and 77.8% respectively (P < 0.01). The recurrence rate did not differ between the three groups. In multivariate analysis, both severe and non-severe complications were found to be risk factors for decreased overall survival at 5 years [hazard ratio (HR) 1.38, 95% CI 1.47-1.92, and HR 1.18, 95% CI 1.27-1.60 respectively; P < 0.05) as well as for decreased 3-year disease-free survival (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.14-1.65, and HR 1.26, 95% CI 1.08-1.48 respectively; P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Complications after colonic resection for cancer are associated with impaired 5-year overall survival and 3-year disease-free survival and exhibit more severe postoperative complications, mainly via mechanisms other than cancer recurrence.

Predictors of Unplanned Returns to the Operating Room within 30 Days in Neurosurgery: Insights from a National Surgical Registry

BACKGROUND

In the modern, increasingly pay-for-performance era, unplanned return to the operating room (ROR) is gaining attention as a surgical quality metric. However, large-scale data on the appropriateness and usefulness of this measure in neurosurgery are scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To provide a comprehensive description of all RORs after neurosurgical procedures in a national surgical registry and identify factors associated with ROR.

METHODS

We queried the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program multicenter database for patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures during 2012-2016. Multivariable logistic regression was conducted to identify factors associated with 30-day unplanned ROR after the 3 most common inpatient cranial and spinal operations: craniotomy for intra-axial neoplasm, convexity/falx meningioma, or skull base tumors; anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; and posterior lumbar decompression and posterior lumbar fusion.

RESULTS

A total of 193,459 cases were identified, of which 7067 (3.7%) had at least 1 unplanned ROR within 30 days after the index procedure (inpatient, 4.3%; outpatient, 1.5%). Overall, the most common reasons were wound complication/surgical site infection (0.7%), hematoma evacuation (0.6%), and repeat surgery (0.5%). On multivariable analysis, the relative amount of variation in reoperation risk was found to be 1%-24% for demographics, 1%-19% for comorbidities, 1%-6% for preoperative laboratory values, and 4%-58% for operative characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings may inform stakeholders on the optimal parameters that need to be taken into account when crafting, endorsing, and implementing quality metrics for neurosurgery that aim to assess surgical performance and reward or penalize hospitals and providers.

Monitoring excess unplanned return to theatre following colorectal cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

To develop a risk-adjustment model for unplanned return to theatre (URTT) outcomes following colorectal surgeries in Australia and New Zealand hospitals and apply top-down and bottom-up statistical process control methods for fair comparison of hospitals and surgeons' URTT rates.

METHODS

We analysed URTT outcomes from hospitals contributing data to the Bi-National Colorectal Cancer Audit clinical registry between 2007 and 2016. Preoperative and intraoperative covariates were considered for risk adjustment. A risk-adjusted rate funnel plot was prepared for between-hospital comparisons and identification of outlying hospitals with unusually high rates of URTT. Cumulative observed-minus-expected charts with cumulative sum signals were then presented for surgeons within an outlying hospital.

RESULTS

The study included 15 134 patients and 166 surgeons across 70 hospitals. The weighted average URTT rate was 5.2%. The risk-adjustment model identified 12 preoperative and intraoperative variables that significantly raise the risk of URTT: male sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, emergency admissions, conversion entry, left hemicolectomy, total colectomy, proctocolectomy, lower anterior resection, ultra-low anterior resection, abdominoperineal resection, organ resection and excess lymph nodes harvested. Right hemicolectomy significantly reduced risk of URTT. URTT rates were not found to significantly vary across seniority of operator; however, comparisons were limited by lack of data on junior operators. The funnel plot identified five hospitals as 'possible outliers' and hospital T was identified as a 'definite outlier'. The cumulative observed-minus-expected charts with cumulative sum signals showed that within hospital T, one surgeon among three had a particularly bad run of URTTs.

CONCLUSION

Feedback from aggregated URTT outcomes using a risk-adjusted rate funnel plot is enhanced when follow-up examination of outlying hospitals is conducted with concurrent application of cumulative observed-minus-expected charts with cumulative sum signals.

National Surgical Quality Improvement Program analysis of unplanned reoperation in patients undergoing low anterior resection or abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer

BACKGROUND

The rate of unplanned reoperation for rectal cancer can provide information about surgical quality. We sought to determine factors associated with unplanned reoperation after low anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for patients with rectal cancer and outcomes after these reoperations.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was used to conduct this retrospective study. Patients who underwent elective low anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer from 2012-2014 were identified. The primary outcomes were 30-day reoperation rates and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 454 low anterior resection patients (5.9%) and 289 abdominoperineal resection patients (8.1%) required reoperation within 30 days of their index operation. The most common reasons for reoperation were infection, bleeding, and bowel obstruction. Multivariate analysis revealed that male sex (odds ratio: 1.5, P = .001), poor functional status (odds ratio: 2.2, P = .04), operative time (odds ratio: 1.001, P = .01), low preoperative albumin (odds ratio: 0.79, P = .04), and lack of ostomy (odds ratio, 0.66, P = .005) were independent risk factors for reoperation after low anterior resection. Smoking (odds ratio: 1.7, P = .001), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio: 1.8, P = .03), poor functional status (odds ratio: 2.1, P = .032), operative time (odds ratio: 1.003, P < .001), low preoperative albumin (odds ratio: 0.69, P = .007), and open approach (odds ratio: 1.5, P = .02) were independent risk factors for reoperation after abdominoperineal resection. Postoperative complication rates are high for those undergoing reoperation, often leading to non-home discharge (P < .001) after reoperation.

CONCLUSION

Reoperation after low anterior resection and abdominoperineal resection for rectal cancer is not uncommon. This study highlights the indications for reoperation, potentially modifiable preoperative risk factors for reoperation, and the morbidity associated with such operations.

Unplanned Reoperations in Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the incidence of and reasons for unplanned reoperations in oral and maxillofacial surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

During a 4-year period, a total of 169 patients undergoing reoperations were encountered. The clinical characteristics and causes were reviewed.

RESULTS

There were 11,151 patients who underwent surgery, and the incidence of unplanned reoperations was 1.52%. The male-to-female ratio was 2.45:1. The average age in this cohort was 51.5 years. Among the common causes of an unplanned return to the operating room, the most common were reoperations performed for postoperative bleeding, diagnostic issues, and vascular crisis (32.54%, 28.40%, and 29.59%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The unplanned reoperation rate was 1.52%. The main causes were postoperative bleeding, diagnostic issues, and vascular crisis. Patients with malignant tumors or microvascular flaps were more likely to undergo unplanned reoperations. Improving perioperative management and diagnostic capability might reduce the incidence of unplanned reoperations.

Oncologist provision of smoking cessation support: A national survey of Australian medical and radiation oncologists

AIM

Continued smoking in patients diagnosed with cancer affects treatment outcomes and overall survival. With national surveys of Australian medical oncologists (MO) and radiation oncologists (RO) we sought to determine current clinical practices, preferences and barriers in providing patient smoking cessation support.

METHODS

Oncologist members of the Medical Oncology Group of Australia (n = 452) and Trans-Tasman Radiation Oncology Group (n = 230) were invited to participate in a multiple choice survey exploring smoking cessation practices and beliefs.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 43%. At first consultations more than 90% of MO and RO regularly asked patients if they smoke or use tobacco products, closely followed by documentation of duration of smoking history and current level of consumption. Less common was asking the patient if they intended to quit (MO 63%, RO 53%) and advising cessation (MO 70%, RO 72%). Less than 50% of oncologists regularly asked about current smoking in follow-up consultations. Although a range of referral options for smoking cessation care were used by oncologists, only 2% of MO and 3% of RO actively managed the patients' smoking cessation themselves and this was the least preferred option. The majority believed they require more training in cessation interventions (67% MO, 57% RO) and cited multiple additional barriers to providing cessation care.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncologists strongly prefer smoking cessation interventions to be managed by other health workers. A collaborative approach with other health professionals is needed to aid the provision of comprehensive smoking cessation care tailored to patients with cancer.

New anthropometric classification scheme of preoperative nutritional status in children: a retrospective observational cohort study

OBJECTIVE

WHO uses anthropometric classification scheme of childhood acute and chronic malnutrition based on low body mass index (BMI) ('wasting') and height for age ('stunting'), respectively. The goal of this study was to describe a novel two-axis nutritional classification scheme to (1) characterise nutritional profiles in children undergoing abdominal surgery and (2) characterise relationships between preoperative nutritional status and postoperative morbidity.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective observational cohort study.

SETTING

The setting was 50 hospitals caring for children in North America that participated in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Paediatric from 2011 to 2013.

PARTICIPANTS

Children >28 days who underwent major abdominal operations were identified.

INTERVENTIONS/MAIN PREDICTOR

The cohort of children was divided into five nutritional profile groups based on both BMI and height for age Z-scores: (1) underweight/short, (2) underweight/tall, (3) overweight/short, (4) overweight/tall and (5) non-outliers (controls).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Multiple variable logistic regressions were used to quantify the association between 30-day morbidity and nutritional profile groups while adjusting for procedure case mix, age and American Society of Anaesthesiologists class.

RESULTS

A total of 39 520 cases distributed as follows: underweight/short (656, 2.2%); underweight/tall (252, 0.8%); overweight/short (733, 2.4%) and overweight/tall (1534, 5.1%). Regression analyses revealed increased adjusted odds of composite morbidity (35%) and reintervention events (75%) in the underweight/short group, while overweight/short patients had increased adjusted odds of composite morbidity and healthcare-associated infections (43%), and reintervention events (79%) compared with controls.

CONCLUSION

Stratification of preoperative nutritional status using a scheme incorporating both BMI and height for age is feasible. Further research is needed to validate this nutritional risk classification scheme for other surgical procedures in children.

An institutional analysis of unplanned return to the operating room to identify areas for quality improvement

BACKGROUND

Unplanned return to the operating room (uROR) has been suggested as a hospital quality indicator. The purpose of this study was to determine reasons for uROR to identify opportunities for patient care improvement.

METHODS

uROR reported by our institution's American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program underwent secondary review.

RESULTS

The uROR rate reported by clinical reviewers was 4.3%. Secondary review re-categorized 64.7% as "true uROR" with the most common reasons for uROR being infection (30.9%) and bleeding (23.6%). Remaining cases were categorized as "false uROR" with the most common reasons being inadequate documentation (60.0%) and not directly related to index procedure (16.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Strict adherence to NSQIP definitions results in misidentification of true uROR. This raises concerns for using NSQIP-identified uROR as a hospital quality metric. Improved processes of care to prevent infection and hemorrhage at our institution could reduce the rate of true uROR.

Estimating Adverse Events After Gastrostomy Tube Placement

OBJECTIVE

Gastrostomy feeding tube placement in children is associated with a high frequency of adverse events. This study sought to preoperatively estimate postoperative adverse events in children undergoing gastrostomy feeding tube placement.

METHODS

This was an observational study of children who underwent gastrostomy with or without fundoplication at 1 of 50 participating hospitals, using 2011-2013 data from the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric. The outcome was the occurrence of any postoperative complications or mortality at 30 days after gastrostomy tube placement. The preoperative clinical characteristics significantly associated with occurrence of adverse events were included in a multivariate logistic model. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was computed to assess model performance and split-set validated.

RESULTS

A total of 2817 children were identified as having undergone gastrostomy tube placement. The unadjusted rate of adverse events within 30 days after gastrostomy tube placement was 11%. Thirteen predictor variables were identified. Notable preoperative variables associated with a greater than 75% increase in adverse event rate were preoperative sepsis/septic shock (odds ratio [OR], 10.76, 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.84-30.17), central nervous system tumor (OR, 3.36; 95% CI, 1.42-7.95), the primary procedure as indicated by the current procedural terminology (CPT) linear risk variable (OR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.50-2.49), severe cardiac risk factors (OR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.17-3.03), and preoperative seizure history (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.38-2.62). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.71 with the derivation data set and 0.71 upon split-set validation.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperatively estimating postoperative adverse events in children undergoing gastrostomy tube placement is feasible.

Unplanned reoperations after vascular surgery

OBJECTIVE

Existing literature on unplanned reoperation (UR) after vascular surgery is limited. The frequency of 30-day UR and its association with other adverse outcomes was analyzed.

METHODS

Patients who underwent vascular procedures in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (2012) were abstracted. UR, captured by a distinct variable now available in the data set, and its association with complications, readmissions, mortality, and failure to rescue (FTR) were analyzed using bivariate and multivariate methods.

RESULTS

Among 35,106 patients, 3545 URs were performed on 2874 patients. The overall UR rate was 10.1%. Among patients who underwent URs, approximately 80.4%, 15.8%, and 3.8% had one, two, and three or more reoperations, respectively; 39.4% of URs occurred after initial discharge. Median time to UR was 7 days but varied by procedure. Procedures with the highest UR rates were embolectomy (18.2%), abdominal bypass (14.4%), and open procedures for peripheral vascular disease (13.8%). Common indications for UR were hemorrhage, graft failure or infection, thromboembolic events, and wound complications. Patients with URs had higher rates of subsequent complications (49.9% vs 19.9%; P < .001), readmission (41.8% vs 7.0%; P < .001), and mortality (8.0% vs 2.5%; P < .001) than those not undergoing URs. FTR was more likely among patients who had a UR (13.6% vs 9.3%; P < .001); this varied within procedure groups. After multivariate adjustment, UR was independently associated with mortality in an incremental fashion (for one UR: adjusted odds ratio, 2.0; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-2.5; for two or more URs: adjusted odds ratio, 3.1; 95% confidence interval, 2.2-4.2).

CONCLUSIONS

URs within 30 days are frequent among patients undergoing vascular surgery and are associated with worse outcomes, including mortality and FTR.

Assessing early unplanned reoperations in neurosurgery: opportunities for quality improvement

OBJECT

Review of morbidities and mortality has been the primary method used to assess surgical quality by physicians, hospitals, and oversight agencies. The incidence of reoperation has been proposed as a candidate quality indicator for surgical care. The authors report a comprehensive assessment of reoperations within a neurosurgical department and discuss how such data can be integrated into quality improvement initiatives to optimize value of care delivery.

METHODS

All neurosurgical procedures performed in the main operating room or the outpatient surgery center at the Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center and UCLA Santa Monica Medical Center from July 2008 to December 2012 were considered for this study. Interventional radiology and stereotactic radiosurgery procedures were excluded. Early reoperations within 7 days of the index surgery were reviewed and their preventability status was evaluated.

RESULTS

The incidence of early unplanned reoperation was 2.6% (occurring after 183 of 6912 procedures). More than half of the patients who underwent early unplanned reoperation initially had surgery for shunt-related conditions (34.4%) or intracranial tumor (23.5%). Shunt failure was the most common indication for early unplanned reoperation (34.4%), followed by postoperative bleeding (20.8%) and postoperative elevated intracranial pressure (9.8%). The average time interval (± SD) between the index surgery and reoperation was 3.0 ± 1.9 days. The average length of stay following reoperation was 12.1 ± 14.4 days.

CONCLUSIONS

This study enabled an in-depth assessment of reoperations within an academic neurosurgical practice and identification of strategic opportunities for department-wide quality improvement initiatives. The authors provide a nuanced discussion regarding the use of absolute reoperations as a quality indicator for neurosurgical patient populations.

Using Merged Clinical and Claims Registry Data to Identify High Utilizers of Surgical Inpatient Care 1 Year after Colectomy

BACKGROUND

Under bundled payment initiatives, providers will be held financially responsible for patients' acute and post-acute care costs. Certain patients, termed high utilizers, use disproportionate shares of resources during 1 year. The aim of this study was to identify high utilizers, describe their costs, and determine whether preoperative characteristics predict high utilizer status.

STUDY DESIGN

Colectomy patients with 1-year follow-up were identified in a linked clinical (American College of Surgeons NSQIP) and administrative (Medicare inpatient claims) dataset (2005 to 2008). Cost of inpatient care was calculated by multiplying patient Medicare charges in each cost center by cost-to-charge ratios from the Medicare cost reports. A mixed-effects logistic model quantified the association between preoperative characteristics and being a high utilizer after elective and emergent colectomies.

RESULTS

One thousand and fifty-five of 10,561 colectomy patients accounted for >50% of the inpatient care cost of the entire cohort during 1 year postoperatively. This top decile of patients were labeled high utilizers and had substantially greater costs in the following cost centers: intensive care ($36,322 vs $0), respiratory ($2,875 vs $22), radiology ($649 vs $29), and cardiology ($5,057 vs $166) (all p < 0.001). High utilizers more frequently had emergent index colectomies (43% vs 17%; p < 0.001). Patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists class IV and V had 2-fold increased odds of being high utilizers after both elective (odds ratio = 2.72; 95% CI, 1.89-3.90) and emergent colectomies (odds ratio = 2.09; 95% CI, 1.23-3.55).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients in the top cost decile account for the majority of costs in the year after colectomy, disproportionately accumulate those costs in particular cost centers, and can be identified preoperatively.

Understanding how colorectal units achieve short length of stay: an interview survey among representative hospitals in England

BACKGROUND

Wide variation in the outcomes of colorectal surgery persists, despite a well-established evidence-base to inform clinical practice. This variation may be attributed to differences in quality of care, but we do not know what this means in practical terms of care delivery. This telephone interview study aimed to identify distinguishing characteristics in the organisation of care among colorectal units with the best length of stay results in England.

METHODS

Ten English National Health Service hospitals were identified with the shortest length of stay after elective colonic surgery between January 2011 and December 2012. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a senior colorectal surgeon and ward nurse, who were not informed of their performance, at each site. Audio recordings were professionally transcribed and thematically analysed for similarities and differences in practice between units.

RESULTS

All ten short length of stay units approached agreed to participate, and 19 of 20 interviews were recorded. These units standardised clinical care based upon an Enhanced Recovery Program. Beyond this, they organised the clinical team to efficiently and reliably deliver this package of care, with the majority of day-to-day care delivered by consultants and nurses. Patients were closely monitored for postoperative deterioration, using a combination of early warning scores, nurses' clinical judgement and regular senior medical review. Of note, operative volume and laparoscopy rates in these units were not statistically significantly different from the national average (p = 0.509 and p = 0.131, respectively). The postoperative analgesic strategy varied widely between units, from routine epidural use to local anaesthetic infiltration or patient-controlled analgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

The Enhanced Recovery Program may be seen as necessary but not sufficient to achieve the best length of stay results. In the study units, consultants and nurses led and delivered the majority of patient care on the ward. High quality teamwork helped detect and resolve clinical issues promptly, with nurses empowered to contact consultants directly if needed. Other units may learn from these teams by adopting protocol-based, consultant- or nurse-delivered care, and by improving coordination and communication between consultants and ward nurses.

The impact of laparoscopic versus open approach on reoperation rate after segmental colectomy: a propensity analysis

BACKGROUND

Reoperation rate has not been well studied as a primary outcome when comparing laparoscopic with open approaches for colorectal resection. The goal of this study was to determine the impact of a laparoscopic approach on rate of reoperation after elective segmental colectomy.

METHODS

The NSQIP PUF for 2005-2011 was used to retrospectively identify patients who underwent open or laparoscopic elective segmental colectomy. The primary outcome measure was 30-day reoperation rate. A multivariable logistic regression model was constructed to determine the independent effect of surgical approach on rates of unplanned reoperation. This was validated with inverse propensity score weighting.

RESULTS

A total of 39,063 patients met the study inclusion criteria. A total of 1,702 reoperations were identified. After open approach, 5.1 % required reoperation, compared to 3.8 % in the laparoscopic group. After adjusting for confounders, open resection had 1.17-fold higher odds than laparoscopy for risk of reoperation, but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.07).

DISCUSSION

Using a large clinical dataset, we found that for segmental colectomy, there was not a statistically significant difference in odds of return to the operating room for laparoscopic versus open surgical approach. Reoperation is a relatively rare but costly complication and remains a potential area for quality improvement.

Unplanned reoperation within 30 days of surgery for colorectal cancer in NHS Lanarkshire

AIM

A recent study of unplanned reoperation within 28 days after colorectal surgery in England found a mean rate of 6.5% and suggested that this be used as a performance indicator. We aimed to find the unplanned 30-day reoperation rate for patients having colorectal cancer surgery in NHS Lanarkshire.

METHOD

This retrospective study identified all patients having surgery for colorectal cancer in NHS Lanarkshire between 2006 and 2008 from a prospective colorectal cancer database. Scottish Morbidity Record (SMR01) data were then examined for each patient to determine whether they returned to the operating theatre within 30 days of the index procedure.

RESULTS

Five hundred and seventy-three patients had a primary operation for colorectal cancer during the period. The unplanned rate of reoperation within 30 days of surgery was 5.4%. There was no statistically significant difference between the hospital site, emergency or elective operation or laparoscopic resection or laparotomy. There was no statistically significant difference in reoperation rate between colorectal and general surgeons.

CONCLUSION

The rate of unplanned reoperation in NHS Lanarkshire compares favourably with that of England; however, similar methodological problems exist. The accuracy of the data is dependent on coding and entry.

Two surgeons, one patient: the impact of surgeon-surgeon familiarity on patient outcomes following mastectomy with immediate reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Mastectomy with immediate reconstruction requires the coordination and expertise of two distinct surgeons. This often results in several different combinations of mastectomy and reconstructive surgeons, but with an unknown impact on patient outcomes. We evaluate the effect of different surgical teams on complication rates following mastectomy and immediate reconstruction.

METHODS

Retrospective review of consecutive patients that underwent mastectomy with immediate prosthetic reconstruction from 4/1998 to 10/2008 at one institution was performed. Patients of the three highest-volume mastectomy and reconstructive surgeons were stratified by their individual combination of surgeons, resulting in nine different surgical teams. Complications were categorized by end-outcome. Appropriate statistics, including multiple linear regression, were performed.

RESULTS

Clinical characteristics were similar among patients (n = 511 patients, 699 breasts) with the same mastectomy surgeon but different reconstructive surgeon. Mean follow-up was 38.4 ± 25.7 months. For each mastectomy surgeon, the choice of reconstructive surgeon did not affect complication rates. Furthermore, the combined complication rates of the three highest-volume teams (n = 384 breasts) were similar to the remaining lower-volume teams (n = 315 breasts). Patient factors, but not the individual surgeon or surgical team, were independent risk factors for complications.

DISCUSSION

Our study suggests that among high-volume surgeons, complication rates following mastectomy with immediate reconstruction are not affected by the surgeon-surgeon familiarity. The individual surgeon's expertise, and patient risk factors, may have a greater impact on outcomes than the team's experience with each other. These results validate the efficacy and safety of the surgeon distribution model currently used by many breast surgery practices.

The economic impact of anastomotic leakage after anterior resections in English NHS hospitals: are we adequately remunerating them?

AIM

Our aim was to determine the frequency and economic impact of anastomotic leakage (AL) at local and national levels in England.

METHOD

All patients who underwent AR in Oxford between 2007 and 2009 were evaluated for AL. Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data were used to determine reoperation rates after elective AR (n = 23 388) in England between 2000 and 2008. Hospital episode remuneration costs were calculated by the local commissioning department and compared with Department of Health (DH) reference index costs.

RESULTS

The frequency of AL following anterior resection was 10.9% (31 out of 285) in Oxford. Laparotomy for leakage was performed in 5.6% of cases. The 30-day hospital mortality rate for all ARs was 2.1%, compared with 3.2% after AL. The national relaparotomy rate (within 28 days) and 30-day hospital mortality in English National Health Service (NHS) trusts following AR were 5.9% and 2.9%, respectively. Institutional remunerated tariffs (£6233 (SD ± 965)) were similar to DH reference costs (£6319 (SD ± 1830)) after uncomplicated AR. However, there was a significant (P = 0.008) discrepancy between the remunerated tariff for AL (£9605 (SD ± 6908)) and the actual cost (£17 220 (SD ± 9642)). AL resulted in an additional annual cost of approximately £1.1 million to £3.5 million when extrapolated nationally.

CONCLUSION

The estimated economic burden of anastomotic leakage following AR is approximately double that of the remunerated tariff.

Accidental puncture or laceration in colorectal surgery: a quality indicator or a complexity measure?

BACKGROUND

Accidental puncture or laceration during a surgical procedure is a patient safety indicator that is publicly reported and will factor into the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid's pay-for-performance plan. Accidental puncture or laceration includes serosal tear, enterotomy, and injury to the ureter, bladder, spleen, or blood vessels.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify risk factors and assess surgical outcomes related to accidental puncture or laceration.

DESIGN

This is a retrospective study.

SETTINGS

This study was conducted in a single-hospital department of colorectal surgery.

PATIENTS

Inpatients undergoing colorectal surgery in which an accidental puncture or laceration did or did not occur were selected.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes measured were surgical complications, length of stay, and readmission.

RESULTS

Of 2897 operations, 269 had accidental puncture or laceration (9.2%) including serosal tear (47%), enterotomy (38%), and extraintestinal injuries (15%). Accidental puncture or laceration cases had more diagnoses of enterocutaneous fistula (11% vs 2%, p < 0.001), reoperative cases (91% vs 61%, p < 0.001), open surgery (96% vs 77%, p < 0.001), longer operative times (186 vs 146 minutes, p = 0.001), and increased length of stay (10 vs 7 days, p = 0.002). Patients with serosal tears had entirely similar outcomes to those without an injury, whereas patients with enterotomies had increased operative times and length of stay, and patients with extraintestinal injuries had higher rates of reoperation and sepsis (p < 0.05 for all).

LIMITATIONS

This study was limited by the loss of sensitivity due to grouping extraintestinal injuries.

CONCLUSIONS

Accidental puncture or laceration is more likely to occur in complex colorectal operations. The clinical consequences range from none to significant depending on the specific type of injury. To make accidental puncture or laceration a more meaningful quality indicator, we advocate that groups who use the measure eliminate the injuries that have no bearing on surgical outcome and that risk adjustment for operative complexity is performed.

How often do patients return to the operating room after colorectal resections?

AIM

We sought to identify the rate of re-operation after an index colorectal surgical procedure and potential contributing risk factors.

METHOD

This is a retrospective cohort study from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. We identified all patients who either returned or did not return to the operating room after any colorectal resection from January 2005 to December 2008.

RESULTS

From a total cohort of 635, 265 patients included in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program over the 4-year study period, we identified 54, 237 patients who underwent colorectal operations. A return to the operating room was coded in 5.4 ± 0.1% of non colorectal resection patients and 7.6 ± 0.2% of colorectal resection patients (P < 0.001). The multivariate model identified patients with postoperative diagnostic codes for abdominal cavity hernia or colostomy complication as having the highest odds of return to the operating room within 30 days. Patients returning to the operating room had longer length of stay and higher overall mortality compared with those patients who did not return to the operating room.

CONCLUSION

Return to the operating room is a relatively common occurrence after colorectal resections, with an associated high rate of mortality. Given the association between return to the operating room and adverse patient outcomes, emphasis should be placed on determining strategies to reduce the need for return to the operating room.

Impact of early reoperation after resection for colorectal cancer on long-term oncological outcomes

AIM

Whether reoperation in the postoperative period adversely affects oncologic outcomes for colorectal cancer patients undergoing resection has not been well characterized. The aim of this study was to determine whether long-term oncological outcomes are affected for patients who undergo repeat surgery in the early postoperative period.

METHOD

From a prospective colorectal cancer database, patients who underwent resection for colorectal cancer between 1982 and 2008 and were reoperated within 30 days after surgery (group A) were matched for age (±5 years), gender, year of surgery (±2 years), American Society of Anesthesiology score, tumor site (colon or rectum), cancer stage and differentiation with patients who did not undergo reoperation (group B). The two groups were compared for overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and local recurrence (LR).

RESULTS

In total, 89 reoperated patients (45 rectal, 44 colon cancer) were matched to an equal number of non-reoperated patients. Anterior resection (39.2%) and right hemicolectomy (19.1%) were predominant primary operations. Indications for reoperation were anastomotic leak/abscess (n=40, 45%), massive bleeding (n=15, 16.9%), bowel obstruction (n=11, 12.4%), wound complications (n=9, 10.1%) and other indications (n=14, 15.6%). Group A had significantly greater overall morbidity (100% vs 27%, P=0.001) and required more blood transfusions (20.2% vs 7.9%, P=0.045). Adjuvant therapy use, on the other hand, was more common in group B (23.6% vs 12.3%, P=0.1). The 5-year OS and DFS were lower in the reoperated group (OS 55.3% vs 66.4%, P=0.02; DFS 50.8% vs 60.8%, P=0.06, respectively). Five-year LR was slightly lower in the reoperated group (2.9% vs 6.3%, P=0.34).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with non-reoperated patients matched for patient, tumour and operative characteristics, patients reoperated in the early postoperative period have worse long-term oncological outcomes. Adoption of strategies to reduce the risk of reoperation may be associated with the additional advantage of improved oncological outcomes in addition to the short-term advantages.

Creating a learning healthcare system in surgery: Washington State's Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program (SCOAP) at 5 years

There are increasing efforts towards improving the quality and safety of surgical care while decreasing the costs. In Washington state, there has been a regional and unique approach to surgical quality improvement. The development of the Surgical Care and Outcomes Assessment Program (SCOAP) was first described 5 years ago. SCOAP is a peer-to-peer collaborative that engages surgeons to determine the many process of care metrics that go into a "perfect" operation, track on risk adjusted outcomes that are specific to a given operation, and create interventions to correct under performance in both the use of these process measures and outcomes. SCOAP is a thematic departure from report card oriented QI. SCOAP builds off the collaboration and trust of the surgical community and strives for quality improvement by having peers change behaviors of one another. We provide, here, the progress of the SCOAP initiative and highlight its achievements and challenges.

Reoperation after colorectal surgery is an independent predictor of the 1-year mortality rate

BACKGROUND

Comparative evaluation of surgical quality among hospitals must improve outcome and efficiency, and reduce medical costs. Reoperation after colorectal surgery is a consequence of surgical complications and therefore considered a quality-of-care indicator. With respect to the mortality rate, the 1-year mortality may be a more meaningful figure than in-hospital mortality, because it also reflects the impact of surgical complications beyond discharge.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of our study was to evaluate the 1-year mortality after colorectal surgery and to identify predicting factors.

DESIGN

This study was a retrospective analysis from our colorectal surgery database.

PATIENTS

All patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery from 2005 to 2008 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Both univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to identify predicting factors. The following variables were analyzed: age, operative risk according to the ASA class, Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index, indication for and type of resection, primary anastomosis, tumor staging, anastomotic leakage, and reoperation.

RESULTS

For 743 consecutive patients, the 1-year mortality rate was 6.9%. Patients were operated on mainly because of colorectal cancer (n = 537; 72%). The rate of reoperation and in-hospital mortality was 12.8% and 2.4%. Univariate survival analysis demonstrated that ASA class, age, Charlson-Age Comorbidity Index, reoperation, and stage of disease were independent predictors of 1-year mortality. Multivariate analysis showed that ASA class (P = .020; HR 1.69), age (P = .015; HR 2.08) and reoperation (P = .001; HR 2.72) are directly correlated with 1-year mortality.

LIMITATIONS

Both patients with benign diseases and colorectal cancer are included. Furthermore, no clear guidelines on whether to perform a reoperation were available.

CONCLUSION

One-year mortality after colorectal surgery is independently predicted by ASA class, age, and reoperation. Our results underline the value of the 1-year mortality rate and the reoperation rate as parameters for quality assessment in colorectal surgery.

Establishing quality in colorectal surgery

AIM

The review aimed to offer a contemporary perspective of the quality of current colorectal surgery.

METHOD

A literature search was undertaken to identify relevant indicators. Citations were included if they related to quality in colorectal surgery. The search terms used included the Medical Subject Heading terms and Boolean characters: 'colon' OR 'colorectal', OR 'rectal' OR 'rectum' AND 'Quality Indicators', OR 'Quality Assurance', OR 'Quality of healthcare', OR 'Reference Standards', OR 'Quality' plus a variable floating term. A two-person independent review was undertaken from resulting citations and their consequent reference lists. The search was limited to citations from 2000 to 2010 in humans and to the English language.

RESULTS

Metrics identified as potential quality indicators in colorectal surgery are discussed according to the structure, process and outcome framework.

CONCLUSION

A clear appreciation of the scope of individual metrics for quality appraisal purposes is necessary if they are to be used meaningfully for performance benchmarking.

Value of failure to rescue as a marker of the standard of care following reoperation for complications after colorectal resection

Background

Complication management appears to be of vital importance to differences in survival following surgery between surgical units. Failure-to-rescue (FTR) rates have not yet distinguished surgical from general medical complications. The aim of this study was to assess whether variability exists in FTR rates after reoperation for serious surgical complications following colorectal cancer resections in England.

Methods

The Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) database was used to identify patients undergoing primary resection for colorectal cancer between 2000 and 2008 in English National Health Service (NHS) trusts. Units were ranked into quintiles according to overall risk-adjusted mortality. Highest and lowest mortality quintiles were compared with respect to reoperation rates and FTR—surgical (FTR-S) rates. FTR-S was defined as the proportion of patients with an unplanned reoperation who died within the same admission.

Results

Some 144 542 patients undergoing resection for colorectal cancer in 150 English NHS trusts were included. On ranking according to risk-adjusted mortality, rates varied significantly between lowest and highest mortality quintiles (5·4 and 9·3 per cent respectively; P = 0·029). Lowest and highest mortality quintiles had equivalent adjusted reoperation rates (both 4·8 per cent; P = 0·211). FTR-S rates were significantly higher at units within the worst mortality quintile (16·8 versus 11·1 per cent; P = 0·002).

Conclusion

FTR-S rates differed significantly between English colorectal units, highlighting variability in ability to prevent death in this high-risk group. This variability may represent differences in serious surgical complication management. FTR-S represents a readily collectable marker of surgical complication management that is likely to be applicable to other surgical specialties.

Variation in reoperation after colorectal surgery in England as an indicator of surgical performance: retrospective analysis of Hospital Episode Statistics

OBJECTIVE

To describe national reoperation rates after elective and emergency colorectal resection and to assess the feasibility of using reoperation as a quality indicator derived from routinely collected data in England.

DESIGN

Retrospective observational study of Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data.

SETTING

HES dataset, an administrative dataset covering the entire English National Health Service.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients undergoing a primary colorectal resection in England between 2000 and 2008.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Reoperation after colorectal resection, defined as any reoperation for an intra-abdominal procedure or wound complication within 28 days of surgery on the index or subsequent admission to hospital.

RESULTS

The national reoperation rate was 6.5% (15,986/246,469). A large degree of variation was identified among institutions and surgeons. Even among institutions and surgical teams with high caseloads, threefold and fivefold differences in reoperation rates were observed between the highest and lowest performing trusts and surgeons. Of the NHS trusts studied, 14.1% (22/156) had adjusted reoperation rates above the upper 99.8% control limit. Factors independently associated with higher risk of reoperation were diagnosis of inflammatory bowel disease (odds ratio 1.33 (95% CI 1.24 to 1.42), P<0.001), presence of multiple comorbidity (odds ratio 1.34 (1.29 to 1.39), P<0.001), social deprivation (1.14 (1.08 to 1.20) for most deprived, P<0.001), male sex (1.33 (1.29 to 1.38), P<0.001), rectal resection (1.63 (1.56 to 1.71), P<0.001), laparoscopic surgery (1.11 (1.03 to 1.20), P = 0.006), and emergency admission (1.21 (1.17 to 1.26), P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is large variation in reoperation after colorectal surgery between hospitals and surgeons in England. If data accuracy can be assured, reoperation may allow performance to be checked against national standards from current routinely collected data, alongside other indicators such as mortality.

Inpatient palliative care consultation: enhancing quality of care for surgical patients by collaboration

Hospital-based surgeons will likely encounter palliative care service colleagues more frequently, given the growth of approved fellowships and hospital palliative care programs. Surgeons may consult with palliative care colleagues to help patients and families manage pain and other symptoms, cope with the distress of acute and chronic illness, manage complex decisions at end-of-life, and negotiate through a critical illness (or combinations thereof). Inpatient palliative care consultation has been shown to improve quality of care, including quality of life and satisfaction of patients, families, and referring clinicians.