Dayo Adeyemo1, Simon Radley. 1. Department of Surgery, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Queen Elizabeth Medical Centre, Birmingham, UK. dhoyho9@aol.com
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The unplanned re-admission rate is a national key performance indicator employed by the UK Department of Health. An adjusted figure, based on admission information data on the hospital electronic Patient Administration System (PAS), but adjusted to take account of case mix is compared with a calculated 'expected'. While previous studies have investigated unplanned re-admission rates in age-, procedure- or process-specific conditions, 'all-cause' general surgical re-admission rate is yet to be studied. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of hospital unplanned re-admission data, and identify patterns or possible causes of unplanned general surgical re-admissions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective audit of case note records of all patients identified from the hospital electronic PAS as unplanned, general surgical re-admissions over a period of 4 consecutive months. RESULTS: Of all 161 re-admissions in this study, 46 (29%) were unrelated to the index admission, planned or involved patient self-discharge during the index admission. Of the 'genuine', unplanned re-admissions, 80 (78%) followed an emergency index admission, 58 (56%) had chronic or recurrent symptoms, for which 26 (25%) were on waiting lists. Fourteen (14%) were multiple admissions of 4 patients, while 8 (8%) re-admissions required further surgery for significant postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned. general surgical re-admission rates collated from hospital PAS systems may be inaccurate. Nearly half of 'genuine', unplanned re-admissions involved patients with chronic and/or recurrent symptoms, which are predictable and may be preventable. Significant postoperative complications accounted for few re-admissions in this study.
INTRODUCTION: The unplanned re-admission rate is a national key performance indicator employed by the UK Department of Health. An adjusted figure, based on admission information data on the hospital electronic Patient Administration System (PAS), but adjusted to take account of case mix is compared with a calculated 'expected'. While previous studies have investigated unplanned re-admission rates in age-, procedure- or process-specific conditions, 'all-cause' general surgical re-admission rate is yet to be studied. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of hospital unplanned re-admission data, and identify patterns or possible causes of unplanned general surgical re-admissions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective audit of case note records of all patients identified from the hospital electronic PAS as unplanned, general surgical re-admissions over a period of 4 consecutive months. RESULTS: Of all 161 re-admissions in this study, 46 (29%) were unrelated to the index admission, planned or involved patient self-discharge during the index admission. Of the 'genuine', unplanned re-admissions, 80 (78%) followed an emergency index admission, 58 (56%) had chronic or recurrent symptoms, for which 26 (25%) were on waiting lists. Fourteen (14%) were multiple admissions of 4 patients, while 8 (8%) re-admissions required further surgery for significant postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Unplanned. general surgical re-admission rates collated from hospital PAS systems may be inaccurate. Nearly half of 'genuine', unplanned re-admissions involved patients with chronic and/or recurrent symptoms, which are predictable and may be preventable. Significant postoperative complications accounted for few re-admissions in this study.
Authors: Kenneth S Boockvar; Ethan A Halm; Ann Litke; Stacey B Silberzweig; MaryAnn McLaughlin; Joan D Penrod; Jay Magaziner; Kenneth Koval; Elton Strauss; Albert L Siu Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Alberto Jiménez-Puente; Javier García-Alegría; Jorge Gómez-Aracena; Luis Hidalgo-Rojas; Luisa Lorenzo-Nogueiras; Emilio Perea-Milla-López; Joaquín Fernández-Crehuet-Navajas Journal: Int J Technol Assess Health Care Date: 2004 Impact factor: 2.188
Authors: Saif S Rathore; JoAnne M Foody; Yongfei Wang; Grace L Smith; Jeph Herrin; Frederick A Masoudi; Pamela Wolfe; Edward P Havranek; Diana L Ordin; Harlan M Krumholz Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-05-21 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Michael T Kassin; Rachel M Owen; Sebastian D Perez; Ira Leeds; James C Cox; Kurt Schnier; Vjollca Sadiraj; John F Sweeney Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-06-21 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Claudia Fischer; Hester F Lingsma; Helen A Anema; Job Kievit; Ewout W Steyerberg; Niek Klazinga Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Claudia Fischer; Hester F Lingsma; Perla J Marang-van de Mheen; Dionne S Kringos; Niek S Klazinga; Ewout W Steyerberg Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-11-07 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Muhammad Faraz Raghib; Muhammad Usman Khalid; Noor Malik; Mir Ibrahim Sajid; Umm E Hani Abdullah; Asra Tanwir; Syed Ather Enam Journal: Cureus Date: 2022-01-20