Examining the relationship between processes of care and selected AHRQ patient safety indicators postoperative wound dehiscence and accidental puncture or laceration using the VA electronic medical record

A scoping review of the methodological approaches used in retrospective chart reviews to validate adverse event rates in administrative data

Patient safety is a key quality issue for health systems. Healthcare acquired adverse events (AEs) compromise safety and quality; therefore, their reporting and monitoring is a patient safety priority. Although administrative datasets are potentially efficient tools for monitoring rates of AEs, concerns remain over the accuracy of their data. Chart review validation studies are required to explore the potential of administrative data to inform research and health policy. This review aims to present an overview of the methodological approaches and strategies used to validate rates of AEs in administrative data through chart review. This review was conducted in line with the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework for scoping reviews. Through database searches, 1054 sources were identified, imported into Covidence, and screened against the inclusion criteria. Articles that validated rates of AEs in administrative data through chart review were included. Data were extracted, exported to Microsoft Excel, arranged into a charting table, and presented in a tabular and descriptive format. Fifty-six studies were included. Most sources reported on surgical AEs; however, other medical specialties were also explored. Chart reviews were used in all studies; however, few agreed on terminology for the study design. Various methodological approaches and sampling strategies were used. Some studies used the Global Trigger Tool, a two-stage chart review method, whilst others used alternative single-, two-stage, or unclear approaches. The sources used samples of flagged charts (n = 24), flagged and random charts (n = 11), and random charts (n = 21). Most studies reported poor or moderate accuracy of AE rates. Some studies reported good accuracy of AE recording which highlights the potential of using administrative data for research purposes. This review highlights the potential for administrative data to provide information on AE rates and improve patient safety and healthcare quality. Nonetheless, further work is warranted to ensure that administrative data are accurate. The variation of methodological approaches taken, and sampling techniques used demonstrate a lack of consensus on best practice; therefore, further clarity and consensus are necessary to develop a more systematic approach to chart reviewing.

Do Not Blame the Resident: the Impact of Surgeon and Surgical Trainee Experience on the Occurrence of Intraoperative Adverse Events (iAEs) in Abdominal Surgery

OBJECTIVE

Intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) are defined as inadvertent injuries that occur during an operation and are associated with increased mortality, morbidity, and health care costs. We sought to study the impact of attending surgeon experience as well as resident training level on the occurrence of iAEs.

DESIGN

The institutional American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and administrative databases for abdominal surgeries were linked and screened for iAEs using the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification-based Patient Safety Indicator "accidental puncture/laceration." Each flagged record was systematically reviewed to confirm iAE occurrence and determine the number of years of independent practice of the attending surgeon and the postgraduate year (PGY) of the assisting resident at the time of the operation. The attending surgeon experience was divided into quartiles (<6 years, 6-13 years, 13-20 years, >20 years). The resident experience level was defined as Junior (PGY-1 to PGY-3) or Senior (PGY-4 or PGY-5). Univariate/bivariate then multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, and operation type and/or complexity (using RVUs as a proxy) were performed to assess the independent impact of resident and attending surgeon experience on the occurrence of iAEs.

SETTING

A large tertiary care teaching hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients included in the 2007-2012 ACS-NSQIP that had an abdominal surgery performed by both an attending surgeon and a resident.

RESULTS

A total of 7685 operations were included and iAEs were detected in 159 of them (2.1%). Junior residents participated in 1680 cases (21.9%), while senior residents were involved in 6005 (78.1%). The iAE rates for attending surgeons with <6, 6-13, 13-20, and >20 years of experience were 2.7%, 1.7%, 2.4%, and 1.4%, respectively. In multivariable analyses, the risk of occurrence of an iAE was significantly decreased for surgeons with >20 years of experience compared to those with <6 years of experience (odds ratio=0.52, 95% confidence interval 0.32-0.86, p = 0.011). On bivariate analyses, iAEs occurred in 1.2% of junior resident cases, while senior residents had an iAE rate of 2.3%. However, after risk adjustment on multivariable analyses, the resident experience level did not significantly impact the rate of iAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The surgeon's level of experience, but not the resident's, is associated with the occurrence of iAEs in abdominal surgery. Efforts to improve patient safety in surgery should explore the value of pairing junior surgeons with the more experienced ones thru formalized coaching programs, rather than focus on curbing resident operative autonomy.

Postoperative wound dehiscence: Predictors and associations

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality patient safety indicators (PSI) were developed as a metric of hospital complication rates. PSI-14 measures postoperative wound dehiscence and specifically how often a surgical wound in the abdominal or pelvic area fails to heal after abdominopelvic surgery. Wound dehiscence is estimated to occur in 0.5-3.4% of abdominopelvic surgeries, and carries a mortality of up to 40%. Postoperative wound dehiscence has been adopted as a surrogate safety outcome measure as it impacts morbidity, length of stay, healthcare costs and readmission rates. Postoperative wound dehiscence cases from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample demonstrate 9.6% excess mortality, 9.4 days of excess hospitalization and $40,323 in excess hospital charges relative to matched controls. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the associations between PSI-14 and measurable medical and surgical comorbidities using the Explorys technology platform to query electronic health record data from a large hospital system serving a diverse patient population in the Washington, DC and Baltimore, MD metropolitan areas. The study population included 25,636 eligible patients who had undergone abdominopelvic surgery between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2012. Of these cases, 786 (2.97%) had postoperative wound dehiscence. Patient-associated comorbidities were strongly associated with PSI-14, suggesting that this indicator may not solely be an indicator of hospital safety. There was a strong association between PSI-14 and opioid use after surgery and this finding merits further investigation.

Examining the validity of AHRQ's patient safety indicators (PSIs): is variation in PSI composite score related to hospital organizational factors?

Increasing use of Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Patient Safety Indicators (PSIs) for hospital performance measurement intensifies the need to critically assess their validity. Our study examined the extent to which variation in PSI composite score is related to differences in hospital organizational structures or processes (i.e., criterion validity). In site visits to three Veterans Health Administration hospitals with high and three with low PSI composite scores ("low performers" and "high performers," respectively), we interviewed a cross-section of hospital staff. We then coded interview transcripts for evidence in 13 safety-related domains and assessed variation across high and low performers. Evidence of leadership and coordination of work/communication (organizational process domains) was predominantly favorable for high performers only. Evidence in the other domains was either mixed, or there were insufficient data to rate the domains. While we found some evidence of criterion validity, the extent to which variation in PSI rates is related to differences in hospitals' organizational structures/processes needs further study.