Literature DB >> 16703443

NIS vs SAGES: a comparison of national and voluntary databases.

J M Morton1, J A Galanko, N J Soper, D E Low, J Hunter, L W Traverso.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surgical outcomes are increasingly examined in an effort to improve quality and reduce medical error. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) is a retrospective, claims-derived and population-based database and the Society of American Gastrointestinal Endoscopic Surgeons (SAGES) Outcomes Project is a prospective, voluntary and specialty surgeon database. We hypothesized that these two sources of outcome data would differ in regard to a single, commonly performed procedure.
METHODS: Both the NIS, a national sample of all nonfederal hospital discharges, and the gastroesophageal reflux disease log of the SAGES Outcomes Project were queried for all fundoplications performed between 1999 and 2001 using either ICD-9 procedure code 44.66 or CPT codes 43280 or 43324. Patients with an emergency admission, age <17 years, and/or diagnoses for either esophageal cancer or achalasia were excluded. Both demographic and outcome variables were compared by either t-test or chi-square analysis, with a p value of <0.05 as significant.
RESULTS: Both data sets were comparable for age and gender; however, the SAGES group had a higher rate of teaching hospital affiliation (71 vs 48%, p < 0.001). SAGES fundoplications had a consistently higher rate of comorbidities, including Barrett's esophagus (2.3 vs 1.1%, p = 0.005). The NIS fundoplications had a clear trend toward more associated procedures, including cholecystectomy (7.2 vs 2%, p < 0.001). Complication rates for the NIS data set were higher, including pulmonary complications (1.7 vs 0.5%, p = 0.03). No statistically significant differences existed between the two data sets for either length of stay or mortality.
CONCLUSIONS: The two databases indicate that fundoplication is an operation with low morbidity and mortality. The SAGES Outcomes Project demonstrated that participating surgeons had a higher affiliation with teaching hospitals, higher reporting of comorbidity, and lower associated procedures than the NIS. Despite having more comorbidity and technical difficulty, patients from the SAGES Outcomes Project had equivalent or lower complication rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16703443     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-004-8829-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  15 in total

1.  Mortality after aortic valve replacement: results from a nationally representative database.

Authors:  B C Astor; R G Kaczmarek; B Hefflin; W R Daley
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 4.330

2.  The STS National Database: current changes and challenges for the new millennium. Committee to Establish a National Database in Cardiothoracic Surgery, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

Authors:  T B Ferguson; S W Dziuban; F H Edwards; M C Eiken; A L Shroyer; P C Pairolero; R P Anderson; F L Grover
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 4.330

3.  Surgical outcomes. What are they and why should they be measured?

Authors:  L W Traverso
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Evaluation of coding data quality of the HCUP National Inpatient Sample.

Authors:  C L Berthelsen
Journal:  Top Health Inf Manage       Date:  2000-11

5.  STS database activities and you: "What's in it for me?".

Authors:  M B Orringer
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2001-07       Impact factor: 4.330

6.  A Canadian comparison of data sources for coronary artery bypass surgery outcome "report cards".

Authors:  W A Ghali; D M Rothwell; H Quan; R Brant; J V Tu
Journal:  Am Heart J       Date:  2000-09       Impact factor: 4.749

7.  Determining benchmarks for evaluation and management coding in an academic division of general surgery.

Authors:  Paul C Kuo; Ann R Douglas; Darren Oleski; Danny O Jacobs; Rebecca A Schroeder
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 6.113

8.  Outcomes assessment and minimally invasive surgery: historical perspective and future directions.

Authors:  S B Archer; M M Sims; R Giklich; B Traverso; B Laycock; B M Wolfe; K N Apfelgren; R J Fitzgibbons; J G Hunter
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.584

9.  Surgeon specific mortality in adult cardiac surgery: comparison between crude and risk stratified data.

Authors:  Ben Bridgewater; Anthony D Grayson; Mark Jackson; Nicholas Brooks; Geir J Grotte; Daniel J M Keenan; Russell Millner; Brian M Fabri; Mark Jones
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-07-05

10.  A prospective analysis of 3525 esophagogastroduodenoscopies performed by surgeons.

Authors:  W P Reed; J W Kilkenny; C E Dias; S D Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2003-11-21       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  3 in total

1.  A comparison of pre-operative comorbidities and post-operative outcomes among patients undergoing laparoscopic nissen fundoplication at high- and low-volume centers.

Authors:  Oliver Adrian Varban; Thomas P McCoy; Carl Westcott
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-05-10       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  The National Hospital Discharge Survey and Nationwide Inpatient Sample: the databases used affect results in THA research.

Authors:  Stijn Bekkers; Arjan G J Bot; Dennis Makarawung; Valentin Neuhaus; David Ring
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2014-08-05       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Analysis of the SAGES outcomes initiative cholecystectomy registry.

Authors:  V Velanovich; J M Morton; M McDonald; R Orlando; G Maupin; L W Traverso
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-12-07       Impact factor: 3.453

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.