Continuous monitoring of adverse effects improves surgical outcomes

BACKGROUND

There has been significant debate about the advantages and disadvantages of using administrative databases or clinical registry in healthcare improvement programs. The aim of this study was to review the implementation and outcomes of an accountability policy through a registry maintained by professionals of the surgical department.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients admitted to the department between 2003 and 2022 were prospectively included. All adverse events (AEs) occurring during the admission, convalescent care in facilities, or at home for a minimum period of 30 days after discharge were recorded.

RESULTS

Out of 60,125 records, 24,846 AEs were documented in 16,802 cases (27.9%). There was a progressive increase in the number of AEs recorded per admission (1.17 in 2003 vs. 1.93 in 2022) with a 26% decrease in entries with AEs (from 35.0% in 2003 to 25.8% in 2022), a 57.5% decrease in reoperations (from 8.0% to 3.4%, respectively), and an 80% decrease in mortality (from 1.8% to 1.0%, respectively). It is noteworthy that a significant reduction in severe AEs was observed between 2011 and 2022 (56% vs. 15.6%).

CONCLUSION

A prospective registry of AEs created and maintained by health professionals, along with transparent presentation and discussion of the results, leads to sustained improvement in outcomes in a surgical department of a university hospital.

Clinical and Administrative Data on the Research of Acute Coronary Syndrome in Spain. Minimum Basic Data Set Validity

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Health outcomes research is done from clinical registries or administrative databases. The aim of this work was to evaluate the concordance of the Minimum Basic Data Set (MBDS) with the DIOCLES (Descripción de la Cardiopatía Isquémica en el Territorio Español) registry and to analyze the implications of use of the MBDS in the study of acute coronary syndrome in Spain.

METHODS

Through indirect identifiers, DIOCLES was linked with MBDS and unique matches were selected. Some of most relevant variables for risk adjustment of in-hospital mortality due to acute myocardial infarction were considered. Kappa coefficient was used to evaluate the concordance; sensitivity, specificity and positive and negative predictive values to measure the validity of the MBDS, and the area under ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve to calculate its discrimination. The results were compared among hospitals quintiles according to their contribution to DIOCLES. The influence of unmatched episodes on results was assessed by a sensitivity analysis, using looser linking criteria.

RESULTS

Overall, 1539 (60.85%) unique matches were achieved. The prevalence was higher in DIOCLES (acute myocardial infarction: 71.09%; Killip 3-4: 9.17%; cerebrovascular accident: 0.97%; thrombolysis: 8.64%; angioplasty: 61.92% and coronary bypass: 1.75%) than in the MBDS (P < .001). The agreement level observed was almost perfect (κ = 0.863). The MBDS showed a sensitivity of 85.10% and a specificity of 98.31%. Most results were confirmed by using sensitivity analysis (79.95% episodes matched).

CONCLUSIONS

The MBDS can be a useful tool for outcomes research of acute coronary syndrome in Spain. The contrast of DIOCLES and MBDS with medical records could verify their validity.