Elaine M. Burns

Systematic review of discharge coding accuracy

INTRODUCTION Routinely collected data sets are increasingly used for research, financial reimbursement and health service planning. High quality data are necessary for reliable analysis. This study aims to assess the published accuracy of routinely collected data sets in Great Britain. METHODS Systematic searches of the EMBASE, PUBMED, OVID and Cochrane databases were performed from 1989 to present using defined search terms. Included studies were those that compared routinely collected data sets with case or operative note review and those that compared routinely collected data with clinical registries. RESULTS Thirty-two studies were included. Twenty-five studies compared routinely collected data with case or operation notes. Seven studies compared routinely collected data with clinical registries. The overall median accuracy (routinely collected data sets versus case notes) was 83.2% (IQR: 67.3-92.1%). The median diagnostic accuracy was 80.3% (IQR: 63.3-94.1%) with a median procedure accuracy of 84.2% (IQR: 68.7-88.7%). There was considerable variation in accuracy rates between studies (50.5-97.8%). Since the 2002 introduction of Payment by Results, accuracy has improved in some respects, for example primary diagnoses accuracy has improved from 73.8% (IQR: 59.3-92.1%) to 96.0% (IQR: 89.3-96.3), P= 0.020. CONCLUSION Accuracy rates are improving. Current levels of reported accuracy suggest that routinely collected data are sufficiently robust to support their use for research and managerial decision-making.

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.

Introduction of laparoscopic bariatric surgery in England: observational population cohort study

Objectives To describe national trends in bariatric surgery and examine the factors influencing outcome in bariatric surgery in England. Design Observational population cohort study. Setting Hospital Episode Statistics database. Participants All patients who had primary gastric bypass, gastric banding, or sleeve gastrectomy procedures between April 2000 and March 2008. Main outcome measures 30 day mortality, mortality at one year after surgery, unplanned readmission to hospitalwithin 28 days, and duration of stay in hospital. Results 6953 primary bariatric procedures were carried out during the study period, of which 3649 were gastric band procedures, 3191 were gastric bypass procedures, and 113 were sleeve gastrectomy procedures. A marked increase occurred in the numbers of bariatric procedures done, from 238 in 2000 to 2543 in 2007, with an increase in the percentage of laparoscopic procedures over the study period (28% (66/238) laparoscopic procedures in 2000 compared with 74.5% (1894/2543) in 2007). Overall, 0.3% (19/6953) patients died within 30 days of surgery. The median length of stay in hospital was 3 (interquartile range 2-6) days. An unplanned readmission to hospital within 28 days of surgery occurred in 8% (556/6953) of procedures. No significant increase in mortality or unplanned readmission was seen over the study period, despite the exponential increase in minimal access surgery and consequently bariatric surgery. Conclusions Bariatric surgery has increased exponentially in England. Although postoperative weight loss and reoperation rates were not evaluated in this observational population cohort study, patients selected for gastric banding had lower postoperative mortality and readmission rates and a shorter length of stay than did those selected for gastric bypass.

Volume analysis of outcome following restorative proctocolectomy

This observational study aimed to determine national provision and outcome following pouch surgery (restorative proctocolectomy, RPC) and to examine the effect of institutional and surgeon caseload on outcome.

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

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.

Minimal-access colorectal surgery is associated with fewer adhesion-related admissions than open surgery

This study aimed to describe national intermediate‐term admission rates for incisional hernia or clinically apparent adhesions following colorectal surgery, and to compare rates following laparoscopic and open approaches.

Reducing the burden of surgical harm: a systematic review of the interventions used to reduce adverse events in surgery.

Objective:To perform a systematic review of interventions used to reduce adverse events in surgery. Background:Many interventions, which aim to improve patient safety in surgery, have been introduced to hospitals. Little is known about which methods provide a measurable decrease in morbidity and mortality. Methods:MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases were searched from inception to Week 19, 2012, for systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and cross-sectional and cohort studies, which reported an intervention aimed toward reducing the incidence of adverse events in surgical patients. The quality of observational studies was measured using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RCTs were assessed using the Cochrane Collaborations tool for assessing risk of bias. Results:Ninety-one studies met inclusion criteria, 26 relating to structural interventions, 66 described modifying process factors. Only 17 (of 42 medium to high quality studies) reported an intervention that produced a significant decrease in morbidity and mortality. Structural interventions were: improving nurse to patient ratios (P = 0.008) and Intensive Care Unit (ITU) physician involvement in postoperative care (P < 0.05). Subspecialization in surgery reduced technical complications (P < 0.01). Effective process interventions were submission of outcome data to national audit (P < 0.05), use of safety checklists (P < 0.05), and adherence to a care pathway (P < 0.05). Certain safety technology significantly reduced harm (P = 0.02), and team training had a positive effect on patient outcome (P = 0.001). Conclusions:Only a small cohort of medium- to high-quality interventions effectively reduce surgical harm and are feasible to implement. It is important that future research remains focused on demonstrating a measurable reduction in adverse events from patient safety initiatives.

Poor 1-year survival in elderly patients undergoing nonelective colorectal resection.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal resection in elderly patients is associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in an emergency setting. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to quantify the risks associated with nonelective colorectal resection up to 1 year after surgery in elderly patients. DESIGN: This is a population-based observational study. SETTING: Data were obtained from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. POPULATION: All patients aged 70 years and older who underwent a nonelective colorectal resection in an English National Health Service Trust hospital between April 2001 and March 2008 were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were 30-day in hospital mortality, 365-day mortality, unplanned readmission within 28 days of discharge, and duration of hospital stay. RESULTS: During the study period, 36,767 nonelective colorectal resections were performed in patients aged ≥70 years in England. Patients were classified into 3 age groups: A (70–75 years), B (76–80 years), and C (>80 years). Thirty-day mortality was 17.0%, 23.3%, and 31.0% in groups A, B, and C (p < 0.001). The overall 30-day medical complication rate was 33.7%, and the reoperation rate was 6.3%. Cardiac and respiratory complications were significantly higher in group C (22.2% and 18.2%, p < 0.001). Mortality in Group C was 51.2% at 1-year postsurgery. Advanced age was an independent determinant of mortality in risk-adjusted regression analyses. LIMITATIONS: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective database. Stage of disease at presentation, severity of complications, and cause of death cannot be ascertained from this database. CONCLUSIONS: In this population-based study, half of all English patients aged over 80 years undergoing nonelective colorectal resection died within 1 year of surgery. Further research is required to identify perioperative and postdischarge strategies that may improve survival in this vulnerable cohort.

A colorectal perspective on voluntary submission of outcome data to clinical registries

The aim of the study was to identify outcome differences amongst patients undergoing resection of colorectal cancer at English National Health Service trusts using Hospital Episode Statistics (HES). A comparison was undertaken of trusts that submitted and those that did not submit, or submitted only poorly, voluntarily to a colorectal clinical registry, the National Bowel Cancer Audit Programme (NBOCAP).

Single measures of performance do not reflect overall institutional quality in colorectal cancer surgery

Objective To evaluate overall performance of English colorectal cancer surgical units identified as outliers for a single quality measure—30 day inhospital mortality. Design 144 542 patients that underwent primary major colorectal cancer resection between 2000/2001 and 2007/2008 in 149 English National Health Service units were included from hospital episodes statistics. Casemix adjusted funnel plots were constructed for 30 day inhospital mortality, length of stay, unplanned readmission within 28 days, reoperation, failure to rescue-surgical (FTR-S) and abdominoperineal excision (APE) rates. Institutional performance was evaluated across all other domains for institutions deemed outliers for 30 day mortality. Outliers were those that lay on or breached 3 SD control limits. ‘Acceptable’ performance was defined if units appeared under the upper 2 SD limit. Results 5 high mortality outlier (HMO) units and 15 low mortality outlier (LMO) units were identified. Of the five HMO units, two were substandard performance outliers (ie, above 3 SD) on another metric (both on high reoperation rates). A further two HMO institutions exceeded the second but not the third SD limits for substandard performance on other outcome metrics. One of the 15 LMO units exceeded 3 SD for substandard performance (APE rate). One LMO institution exceeded the second but not the third SD control limits for high reoperation rates. Institutional mortality correlated with FTR-S and reoperations (R=0.445, p<0.001 and R=0.191, p<0.020 respectively). Conclusions Performance appraisal in colorectal surgery is complex and dependent on stakeholder perspective. Benchmarking units solely on a single performance measure is over simplistic and potentially hazardous. A global appraisal of institutional outcome is required to contextualise performance.