Literature DB >> 22987164

Brief tool to measure risk-adjusted surgical outcomes in resource-limited hospitals.

Jamie E Anderson1, Randi Lassiter, Stephen W Bickler, Mark A Talamini, David C Chang.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a risk-adjusted tool with fewer than 10 variables to measure surgical outcomes in resource-limited hospitals.
DESIGN: All National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) preoperative variables were used to develop models to predict inpatient mortality. The models were built by sequential addition of variables selected based on their area under the receiver operator characteristic curve (AUROC) and externally validated using data based on medical record reviews at 1 hospital outside the data set. SETTING Model development was based on data from the NSQIP from 2005 to 2009. Validation was based on data from 1 nonurban hospital in the United States from 2009 to 2010. PATIENTS: A total of 631 449 patients in NSQIP and 239 patients from the validation hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The AUROC value for each model.
RESULTS: The AUROC values reached higher than 90% after only 3 variables (American Society of Anesthesiologists class, functional status at time of surgery, and age). The AUROC values increased to 91% with 4 variables but did not increase significantly with additional variables. On validation, the model with the highest AUROC was the same 3-variable model (0.9398).
CONCLUSIONS: Fewer than 6 variables may be necessary to develop a risk-adjusted tool to predict inpatient mortality, reducing the cost of collecting variables by 95%. These variables should be easily collectable in resource-poor settings, including low- and middle-income countries, thus creating the first standardized tool to measure surgical outcomes globally. Research is needed to determine which of these limited-variable models is most appropriate in a variety of clinical settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22987164      PMCID: PMC4282492          DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.2012.699

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Surg        ISSN: 0004-0010


  20 in total

1.  A comparison of the abilities of nine scoring algorithms in predicting mortality.

Authors:  J Wayne Meredith; Gregory Evans; Patrick D Kilgo; Ellen MacKenzie; Turner Osler; Gerald McGwin; Stephen Cohn; Thomas Esposito; Thomas Gennarelli; Michael Hawkins; Charles Lucas; Charles Mock; Michael Rotondo; Loring Rue; Howard R Champion
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2002-10

2.  Variability in the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification Scale.

Authors:  Wendy L Aronson; Maura S McAuliffe; Ken Miller
Journal:  AANA J       Date:  2003-08

3.  Risk adjustment of the postoperative morbidity rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study.

Authors:  J Daley; S F Khuri; W Henderson; K Hur; J O Gibbs; G Barbour; J Demakis; G Irvin; J F Stremple; F Grover; G McDonald; E Passaro; P J Fabri; J Spencer; K Hammermeister; J B Aust; C Oprian
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  1997-10       Impact factor: 6.113

4.  National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) risk factors can be used to validate American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Classification (ASA PS) levels.

Authors:  Daniel L Davenport; Edwin A Bowe; William G Henderson; Shukri F Khuri; Robert M Mentzer
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 5.  Evaluating the quality of medical care.

Authors:  A Donabedian
Journal:  Milbank Mem Fund Q       Date:  1966-07

6.  Measures of gain in certainty from a diagnostic test.

Authors:  F A Connell; T D Koepsell
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1985-05       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Improving the Glasgow Coma Scale score: motor score alone is a better predictor.

Authors:  C Healey; Turner M Osler; Frederick B Rogers; Mark A Healey; Laurent G Glance; Patrick D Kilgo; Steven R Shackford; J Wayne Meredith
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  2003-04

8.  An assessment of the consistency of ASA physical status classification allocation.

Authors:  S R Haynes; P G Lawler
Journal:  Anaesthesia       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 6.955

9.  Multivariable predictors of postoperative cardiac adverse events after general and vascular surgery: results from the patient safety in surgery study.

Authors:  Daniel L Davenport; Victor A Ferraris; Patrick Hosokawa; William G Henderson; Shukri F Khuri; Robert M Mentzer
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 6.113

10.  Statistics review 13: receiver operating characteristic curves.

Authors:  Viv Bewick; Liz Cheek; Jonathan Ball
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2004-11-04       Impact factor: 9.097

View more
  11 in total

1.  Derivation, Validation and Application of a Pragmatic Risk Prediction Index for Benchmarking of Surgical Outcomes.

Authors:  Richard T Spence; David C Chang; Haytham M A Kaafarani; Eugenio Panieri; Geoffrey A Anderson; Matthew M Hutter
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Inter-rater reliability of the PIPES tool: validation of a surgical capacity index for use in resource-limited settings.

Authors:  Abraham Markin; Roxana Barbero; Jeffrey J Leow; Reinou S Groen; Greg Perlman; Elizabeth B Habermann; Keith N Apelgren; Adam L Kushner; Benedict C Nwomeh
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.352

3.  An Online Tool for Global Benchmarking of Risk-Adjusted Surgical Outcomes.

Authors:  Richard T Spence; David C Chang; Kathryn Chu; Eugenio Panieri; Jessica L Mueller; Matthew M Hutter
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Universities form research partnership to improve care in Mozambique.

Authors:  John Rose; Peter Bendix; Carlos Funzamo; Fernando Vaz; Antonio Assis da Costa; Stephen Bickler; Emilia Virginia Noormahomed
Journal:  Bull Am Coll Surg       Date:  2015-01

5.  An efficient risk adjustment model to predict inpatient adverse events after surgery.

Authors:  Jamie E Anderson; John Rose; Abraham Noorbakhsh; Mark A Talamini; Samuel R G Finlayson; Stephen W Bickler; David C Chang
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  How Much Data are Good Enough? Using Simulation to Determine the Reliability of Estimating POMR for Resource-Constrained Settings.

Authors:  Isobel H Marks; Zhi Ven Fong; Sahael M Stapleton; Ya-Ching Hung; Yanik J Bababekov; David C Chang
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Epidemiology and mortality of pediatric surgical conditions: insights from a tertiary center in Uganda.

Authors:  Maija Cheung; Nasser Kakembo; Nensi Rizgar; David Grabski; Sarah Ullrich; Arlene Muzira; Phyllis Kisa; John Sekabira; Doruk Ozgediz
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2019-07-19       Impact factor: 1.827

8.  Creating an inexpensive hospital-wide surgical complication register for performance monitoring: a cohort study.

Authors:  Ira H Saarinen; Antti Malmivaara; Heini Huhtala; Antti Kaipia
Journal:  BMJ Open Qual       Date:  2022-07

9.  Optimizing risk-adjusted outcome measures: a moving target. Invited commentary on: Variability of NSQIP assessed surgical quality based on age and disease process.

Authors:  Marquita R Decker; David Y Greenblatt
Journal:  J Surg Res       Date:  2013-02-21       Impact factor: 2.192

10.  Local Research Catalyzes National Surgical Planning Comment on "Global Surgery - Informing National Strategies for Scaling Up Surgery in Sub-Saharan Africa".

Authors:  Micah G Katz; Raymond R Price; Jade M Nunez
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2018-11-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.