Mehul V. Raval

The Influence of Resident Involvement on Surgical Outcomes

BACKGROUNDnAlthough the training of surgical residents is often considered in national policy addressing complications and safety, the influence of resident intraoperative involvement on surgical outcomes has not been well studied.nnnSTUDY DESIGNnWe identified 607,683 surgical cases from 234 hospitals from the 2006 to 2009 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP). Outcomes were compared by resident involvement for all general and vascular cases as well as for specific general surgical procedures.nnnRESULTSnAfter typical ACS NSQIP comorbidity risk adjustment and further adjustment for hospital teaching status and operative time in modeling, resident intraoperative involvement was associated with slightly increased morbidity when assessing overall general or vascular procedures (odds ratio [OR] 1.06; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.09), pancreatectomy or esophagectomy (OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.08 to 1.45), and colorectal resections (OR 1.15; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.22). In contrast, for mortality, resident intraoperative involvement was associated with reductions for overall general and vascular procedures (OR 0.91; 95% CI 0.84 to 0.99), colorectal resections (OR 0.88; 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99), and abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.53 to 0.95). Results were moderated somewhat after hierarchical modeling was performed to account for hospital-level variation, with mortality results no longer reaching significance (overall morbidity OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.10, overall mortality OR 0.97; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.05). Based on risk-adjusted event rates, resident intraoperative involvement is associated with approximately 6.1 additional morbidity events but 1.4 fewer deaths per 1,000 general and vascular surgery procedures.nnnCONCLUSIONSnResident intraoperative participation is associated with slightly higher morbidity rates but slightly decreased mortality rates across a variety of procedures and is minimized further after taking into account hospital-level variation. These clinically small effects may serve to reassure patients and others that resident involvement in surgical care is safe and possibly protective with regard to mortality.

Association of surgical care improvement project infection-related process measure compliance with risk-adjusted outcomes: Implications for quality measurement

BACKGROUNDnFacility-level process measure adherence is being publicly reported. However, the association between measure adherence and surgical outcomes is not well-established. Our objective was to determine the degree to which Surgical Care Improvement Project (SCIP) process measures are associated with American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) risk-adjusted outcomes.nnnSTUDY DESIGNnThis cross-sectional study included hospitals participating in the ACS NSQIP and SCIP (n = 200). ACS NSQIP outcomes (30-day overall morbidity, serious morbidity, surgical site infections [SSI], and mortality) and adherence to SCIP SSI-related process measures (from the Hospital Compare database) were collected from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2008. Hospital-level correlation coefficients between compliance with 4 process measures (ie, antibiotic administration within 1 hour before incision [SCIP-1]; appropriate antibiotic prophylaxis [SCIP-2]; antibiotic discontinuation within 24 hours after surgery [SCIP-3]; and appropriate hair removal [SCIP 6]) and 4 risk-adjusted outcomes were calculated. Regression analyses estimated the contribution of process measure adherence to risk-adjusted outcomes.nnnRESULTSnOf 211 ACS NSQIP hospitals, 95% had data reported by Hospital Compare. Depending on the measure, hospital-level compliance ranged from 60% to 100%. Of the 16 correlations, 15 demonstrated nonsignificant associations with risk-adjusted outcomes. The exception was the relationship between SCIP-2 and SSI (p = 0.004). SCIP-1 demonstrated an intriguing but nonsignificant relationship with SSI (p = 0.08) and overall morbidity (p = 0.08). Although adherence to SCIP-2 was a significant predictor of risk-adjusted SSI (p < 0.0001) and overall morbidity (p < 0.0001), inclusion of compliance for SCIP-1 and SCIP-2 caused only slight improvement in model quality.nnnCONCLUSIONSnBetter adherence to infection-related process measures over the observed range was not significantly associated with better outcomes with one exception. Different measures of quality might be needed for surgical infection.

Using the NCDB for cancer care improvement: an introduction to available quality assessment tools.

Improving the quality of cancer care requires high‐quality data, mechanisms to feed back information to hospitals, systems to act on the data, and participation of providers. The purpose of this review is to describe how the National Cancer Database (NCDB) can be utilized to improve the quality of cancer care in the United States through a variety of benchmarking reports and data feedback mechanisms available to hospitals approved by the Commission on Cancer (CoC). J. Surg. Oncol. 2009;99:488–490.

Post-discharge venous thromboembolism after cancer surgery: extending the case for extended prophylaxis.

Objective:To (1) define the frequency of overall and postdischarge venous thromboembolism (VTE) after cancer surgery, (2) identify VTE risk for individual cancer operations, and (3) assess mortality rates in patients who experienced a VTE. Summary and Background Data:Cancer is a known risk factor for VTE but less is known about VTE risk after specific cancer operations. Moreover, most cancer patients routinely receive VTE prophylaxis postoperatively while in the hospital, but few receive prolonged prophylaxis despite strong evidence it reduces postdischarge events. Methods:From 211 ACS NSQIP hospitals, 44,656 patients undergoing surgery for 9 cancers were identified (2006–2008). The frequency of VTE within 30-days of surgery was evaluated by cancer site and categorized as occurring before or after discharge. Multivariable logistic regression models were constructed to assess risk factors associated with VTE. Results:VTE occurred in 1.6% of all patients, most frequently after esophagogastric (4.2%) and hepatopancreaticobiliary (3.6%) surgery. Overall, 33.4% of VTEs occurred postdischarge (from 17.9% for esophagogastric to 100% for endocrine operations). Factors associated with VTE were age (≥65 years), cancer/procedure type, metastatic disease, congestive heart failure, body mass index (BMI; ≥25 kg/m2), ascites, thrombocytosis (>400,000 cells/mm3), albumin (<3.0 g/dL), and operation duration (>2 hours; all P < 0.001). Overall VTE was significantly more likely after gastrointestinal, lung, prostate, and ovarian/uterine operations (all P < 0.001). In those experiencing a VTE, mortality increased over 6-fold (8.0% vs. 1.3%; P < 0.001). Conclusion:One-third of VTE events in cancer surgery patients occurred postdischarge. Postoperative VTE was associated with operation type. Routine postdischarge VTE prophylaxis should be considered for high-risk patients.

Pediatric American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: feasibility of a novel, prospective assessment of surgical outcomes

PURPOSEnThe American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) provides validated assessment of surgical outcomes. This study reports initiation of an ACS NSQIP Pediatric at 4 childrens hospitals.nnnMETHODSnFrom October 2008 to June 2009, 121 data variables were prospectively collected for 3315 patients, including 30-day outcomes and tailoring the ACS NSQIP methodology to childrens surgical specialties.nnnRESULTSnThree hundred seven postoperative complications/occurrences were detected in 231 patients representing 7.0% of the study population. Of the patients with complications, 175 (75.7%) had 1, 39 (16.9%) had 2, and 17 (7.4%) had 3 or more complications. There were 13 deaths (0.39%) and 14 intraoperative occurrences (0.42%) detected. The most common complications were infection, 105 (34%) (SSI, 54; sepsis, 31; pneumonia, 13; urinary tract infection, 7); airway/respiratory events, 27 (9%); wound disruption, 18 (6%); neurologic events, 8 (3%) (nerve injury, 4; stroke/vascular event, 2; hemorrhage, 2); deep vein thrombosis, 3 (<1%); renal failure, 3 (<1%); and cardiac events, 3 (<1%). Current sampling captures 17.5% of cases across institutions with unadjusted complication rates ranging from 6.8% to 10.2%. Completeness of data collection for all variables exceeded 95% with 98% interrater reliability and 87% of patients having full 30-day follow-up.nnnCONCLUSIONnThese data represent the first multiinstitutional prospective assessment of specialty-specific surgical outcomes in children. The ACS NSQIP Pediatric is poised for institutional expansion and future development of risk-adjusted models.

American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric: A Phase 1 Report

BACKGROUNDnThere has been a long-standing desire to implement a multi-institutional, multispecialty program to address surgical quality improvement for children. This report documents results of the initial phase of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric.nnnSTUDY DESIGNnFrom October 2008 to December 2009, patients from 4 pediatric referral centers were sampled using American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program methodology tailored to children.nnnRESULTSnA total of 7,287 patients were sampled, representing general/thoracic surgery (n = 2,237; 30.7%), otolaryngology (n = 1,687; 23.2%), orthopaedic surgery (n = 1,367; 18.8%), urology (n = 893; 12.3%), neurosurgery (n = 697; 9.6%), and plastic surgery (n = 406; 5.6%). Overall mortality rate detected was 0.3% and 287 (3.9%) patients had postoperative occurrences. After accounting for demographic, preoperative, and operative factors, occurrences were 4 times more likely in those undergoing inpatient versus outpatient procedures (odds ratio [OR] = 4.71; 95% CI, 3.01-7.35). Other factors associated with higher likelihood of postoperative occurrences included nutritional/immune history, such as preoperative weight loss/chronic steroid use (OR = 1.49; 95% CI, 1.03-2.15), as well as physiologic compromise, such as sepsis/inotrope use before surgery (OR = 1.68; 95% CI, 1.10-1.95). Operative factors associated with occurrences included multiple procedures under the same anesthetic (OR = 1.58; 95% CI, 1.21-2.06) and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification category 4/5 versus 1 (OR = 5.74; 95% CI, 2.94-11.24). Specialty complication rates varied from 1.5% for otolaryngology to 9.0% for neurosurgery (p < 0.001), with specific procedural groupings within each specialty accounting for the majority of complications. Although infectious complications were the predominant outcomes identified across all specialties, distribution of complications varied by specialty.nnnCONCLUSIONSnBased on this initial phase of development, the highly anticipated American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Pediatric has the potential to identify outcomes of childrens surgical care that can be targeted for quality improvement efforts.

Improving American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Risk Adjustment: Incorporation of a Novel Procedure Risk Score

BACKGROUNDnRisk-adjusted evaluation is a key component of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP). The purpose of this study was to improve standard ACS NSQIP risk adjustment using a novel procedure risk score.nnnSTUDY DESIGNnCurrent Procedural Terminology codes (CPTs) represented in ACS NSQIP data were assigned to 136 procedure groups. Log odds predicted risk from preliminary logistic regression modeling generated a continuous risk score for each procedure group, used in subsequent modeling. Appropriate subsets of 271,368 patients in the 2008 ACS NSQIP were evaluated using logistic models for overall 30-day morbidity, 30-day mortality, and surgical site infection (SSI). Models were compared when including either work Relative Value Unit (RVU), RVU and the standard ACS NSQIP CPT range variable (CPT range), or RVU and the newly constructed CPT risk score (CPT risk), plus routine ACS NSQIP predictors.nnnRESULTSnWhen comparing the CPT risk models with the CPT range models for morbidity in the overall general and vascular surgery dataset, CPT risk models provided better discrimination through higher c statistics at earlier steps (0.81 by step 3 vs 0.81 by step 46), more information through lower Akaikes information criterion (127,139 vs 130,019), and improved calibration through a smaller Hosmer-Lemeshow chi-square statistic (48.76 vs 116.79). Improved model characteristics of CPT risk over CPT range were most apparent for broader patient populations and outcomes. The CPT risk and standard CPT range models were moderately consistent in identification of outliers as well as assignment of hospitals to quality deciles (weighted kappa ≥ 0.870).nnnCONCLUSIONSnInformation from focused, clinically meaningful CPT procedure groups improves the risk estimation of ACS NSQIP models.

Comparison of 30-day outcomes after emergency general surgery procedures: Potential for targeted improvement

BACKGROUNDnPatients who undergo emergency operations represent a high-risk population and have been shown to have a high risk of poor outcomes. Little is known, however, about the variability in the quality of emergency general surgical care across hospitals or within hospitals across different procedures. The objectives of this study were to identify risk factors associated with adverse events, to compare 30-day outcomes after 3 common emergency general surgery procedures within and across hospitals, and thus, to determine whether the quality of emergency surgical care is procedure-dependent or intrinsic to other aspects of the hospital environment.nnnMETHODSnPatients who underwent emergency appendectomy, cholecystectomy, or colorectal resection at 95 hospitals that submitted at least 20 of each procedure were identified in the 2005-2008 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database. Outcomes of interest included 30-day overall morbidity and serious morbidity/mortality. Step-wise logistic regression generated patient-level predicted probabilities of an outcome. Based on the expected probabilities, observed to expected (O/E) ratios for each outcome, after each of the 3 procedures, were calculated for each hospital. Hospitals were divided into terciles based on O/E ratios. The agreement on hospital outcomes performance for overall morbidity and serious morbidity/mortality after appendectomy, cholecystectomy, and colorectal resection was assessed using weighted kappa statistics.nnnRESULTSnOf the 30,788 appendectomies, 1,984 (6.44%) patients had any morbidity, and 1,140 (3.70%) patients had a serious morbidity or died. Of the 5,824 cholecystectomies, 503 (8.64%) patients had any morbidity, and 371 (6.37%) patients had a serious morbidity or died. Of the 8,990 colorectal resections, 4,202 (46.74%) patients had any morbidity, and 3,736 (41.56%) patients had a serious morbidity or died. For overall morbidity, O/E ratios for appendectomy ranged from 0.26 to 2.36; O/E ratios for cholecystectomy ranged from 0 to 3.04; O/E ratios for colorectal resection ranged from 0.45 to 1.51. For serious morbidity/mortality, O/E ratios for appendectomy ranged from 0.23 to 2.54; O/E ratios for cholecystectomy ranged from 0 to 4.28; O/E ratios for colorectal resection ranged from 0.59 to 1.75. Associations of risk-adjusted hospital outcomes based on tercile rank between procedures demonstrated slight but significant agreement for both overall morbidity (weighted kappa between 0.20 and 0.22) and serious morbidity/mortality (weighted kappa between 0.18 and 0.22). Despite this, 7 (7.4%) hospitals for overall morbidity and 9 (9.5%) hospitals for serious morbidity/mortality were rated in the highest (best) tercile for all procedures. Eight (8.4%) hospitals for overall morbidity and 8 (8.4%) hospitals for serious morbidity/mortality were rated in the lowest tercile for all procedures.nnnCONCLUSIONnEmergency general surgery procedures, particularly colorectal resections, were associated with substantial 30-day overall morbidity and serious morbidity/mortality. Most hospitals did not have consistent risk-adjusted outcomes across all 3 procedures, but for a substantive minority of institutions (7-10%), good or bad performance was generalizable across procedures. Individual hospitals should examine their procedure-specific outcomes after emergency general surgery operations to focus quality improvement initiatives appropriately.

Comparison of Hospital Performance in Emergency Versus Elective General Surgery Operations at 198 Hospitals

BACKGROUNDnSurgical quality improvement has focused on elective general surgery (ELGS) outcomes despite the substantial risk associated with emergency general surgery (EMGS) procedures. Furthermore, any differences in the quality of care provided to EMGS versus ELGS patients are not well described. We compared risk factors and risk-adjusted outcomes associated with EMGS and ELGS procedures to assess whether hospitals have comparable outcomes across these procedures.nnnSTUDY DESIGNnUsing American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data (2005 to 2008), regression models were constructed for 30-day overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and mortality among all patients, EMGS patients, and ELGS patients. Observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios were calculated from models based on EMGS or ELGS patients. Association of hospital performance after EMGS versus ELGS procedures was assessed by evaluating correlations of O/E ratios; agreement in outlier status (hospitals where O/E confidence intervals [CI] do not overlap 1.0) was evaluated with weighted kappa.nnnRESULTSnOf 473,619 procedures, 67,445 (14.2%) patients underwent an EMGS procedure. EMGS patients were more likely to experience any morbidity (odds ratio [OR] 1.20; 95% CI 1.16 to 1.23), serious morbidity (OR 1.26; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.30), and mortality (OR 1.39; 95% CI 1.30 to 1.48). Correlation between O/E ratios for EMGS and ELGS were moderate to low (overall morbidity = 0.48, p < 0.0001; serious morbidity = 0.41, p < 0.0001, mortality = 0.18, p = 0.01). Outlier status was not consistent across EMGS and ELGS, with only slight agreement (overall morbidity = 0.18, p < 0.0001; serious morbidity = 0.16, p = 0.001, mortality = 0.19, p = 0.01).nnnCONCLUSIONSnEMGS patients are at substantially greater risk than ELGS patients for adverse events. Hospitals do not appear to have highly consistent performance across EMGS and ELGS outcomes. Processes of care that afford improved outcomes to EMGS patients need to be identified and disseminated.

National Assessment of Melanoma Care Using Formally Developed Quality Indicators

PURPOSEnThere is considerable variation in the quality of cancer care delivered in the United States. Assessing care by using quality indicators could help decrease this variability. The objectives of this study were to formally develop valid quality indicators for melanoma and to assess hospital-level adherence with these measures in the United States.nnnMETHODSnQuality indicators were identified from available literature, consensus guidelines, and melanoma experts. Thirteen experts ranked potential measures for validity on the basis of the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methodology. Adherence with individual valid indicators and a composite measure of all indicators were assessed at 1,249 Commission on Cancer hospitals by using the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB; 2004 through 2005).nnnRESULTSnOf 55 proposed quality indicators, 26 measures (47%) were rated as valid. These indicators assessed structure (n = 1), process (n = 24), and outcome (n = 1). Of the 26 measures, 10 are readily assessable by using cancer registry data. Adherence with valid indicators ranged from 11.8% to 96.5% at the patient level and 3.7% to 83.0% at the hospital level. (Adherence required that >OR= 90% of patients at a hospital receive concordant care.) Most hospitals were adherent with 50% or fewer of the individual indicators (median composite score, five; interquartile range, four to seven). Adherence was higher for diagnosis and staging measures and was lower for treatment indicators.nnnCONCLUSIONnThere is considerable variation in the quality of melanoma care in the United States. By using these formally developed quality indicators, hospitals can assess their adherence with current melanoma care guidelines through feedback mechanisms from the NCDB and can better direct quality improvement efforts.