BACKGROUND: Readmission rates after intestinal surgery have been notably high, ranging from 10 % for elective surgery to 21 % for urgent/emergent surgery. Other than adherence to established strategies for decreasing individual postoperative complications, there is little guidance available for providers to work toward reducing their postoperative readmission rates. STUDY DESIGN: Processes of care that may affect postoperative readmissions were identified through a systematic literature review, assessment of existing guidelines, and semi-structured interviews with individuals who have expertise in hospital readmissions and surgical quality improvement. Eleven experts ranked potential process measures for validity on the basis of the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methodology. RESULTS: Of 49 proposed process measures, 34 (69 %) were rated as valid. Of the 34 valid measures, two measures addressed care in the preoperative period. These included evaluation of patient's comorbidities, providing written instruction detailing the anticipated perioperative course, and communication with the patient's referring or primary care doctor. A measure addressing perioperative care stated that institutions should have a standardized perioperative care protocol. Additional measures focused on discharge instructions and communication. CONCLUSIONS: An expert panel identified several aspects of care that are considered essential to quality patient care and important to reducing postoperative readmissions.
BACKGROUND: Readmission rates after intestinal surgery have been notably high, ranging from 10 % for elective surgery to 21 % for urgent/emergent surgery. Other than adherence to established strategies for decreasing individual postoperative complications, there is little guidance available for providers to work toward reducing their postoperative readmission rates. STUDY DESIGN: Processes of care that may affect postoperative readmissions were identified through a systematic literature review, assessment of existing guidelines, and semi-structured interviews with individuals who have expertise in hospital readmissions and surgical quality improvement. Eleven experts ranked potential process measures for validity on the basis of the RAND/University of California, Los Angeles Appropriateness Methodology. RESULTS: Of 49 proposed process measures, 34 (69 %) were rated as valid. Of the 34 valid measures, two measures addressed care in the preoperative period. These included evaluation of patient's comorbidities, providing written instruction detailing the anticipated perioperative course, and communication with the patient's referring or primary care doctor. A measure addressing perioperative care stated that institutions should have a standardized perioperative care protocol. Additional measures focused on discharge instructions and communication. CONCLUSIONS: An expert panel identified several aspects of care that are considered essential to quality patient care and important to reducing postoperative readmissions.
Authors: Evangelos Messaris; Rishabh Sehgal; Susan Deiling; Walter A Koltun; David Stewart; Kevin McKenna; Lisa S Poritz Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2012-02 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Evan C White; Gil Y Melmed; Eric Vasiliauskas; Marla Dubinsky; Andrew Ippoliti; Dermot McGovern; Stephan Targan; Phillip Fleshner Journal: Dis Colon Rectum Date: 2012-05 Impact factor: 4.585
Authors: Andre da Luz Moreira; Ravi P Kiran; Hasan T Kirat; Feza H Remzi; Daniel P Geisler; James M Church; Thomas Garofalo; Victor W Fazio Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2009-12-24 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Joseph C Carmichael; Deborah S Keller; Gabriele Baldini; Liliana Bordeianou; Eric Weiss; Lawrence Lee; Marylise Boutros; James McClane; Scott R Steele; Liane S Feldman Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2017-08-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Sachin Wani; V Raman Muthusamy; Nicholas J Shaheen; Rena Yadlapati; Robert Wilson; Julian A Abrams; Jacques Bergman; Amitabh Chak; Kenneth Chang; Ananya Das; John Dumot; Steven A Edmundowicz; Glenn Eisen; Gary W Falk; M Brian Fennerty; Lauren Gerson; Gregory G Ginsberg; David Grande; Matt Hall; Ben Harnke; John Inadomi; Janusz Jankowski; Charles J Lightdale; Jitin Makker; Robert D Odze; Oliver Pech; Richard E Sampliner; Stuart Spechler; George Triadafilopoulos; Michael B Wallace; Kenneth Wang; Irving Waxman; Srinadh Komanduri Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2017-06-01 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Rena Yadlapati; Andrew J Gawron; Karl Bilimoria; Rajesh N Keswani; Kerry B Dunbar; Peter J Kahrilas; Philip Katz; Joel Richter; Felice Schnoll-Sussman; Nathaniel Soper; Marcelo F Vela; John E Pandolfino Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2014-11-18 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Ira L Leeds; Vjollca Sadiraj; James C Cox; Xiaoxue Sherry Gao; Timothy M Pawlik; Kurt E Schnier; John F Sweeney Journal: Am J Surg Date: 2016-10-20 Impact factor: 2.565
Authors: Erik H Hoyer; William V Padula; Daniel J Brotman; Natalie Reid; Curtis Leung; Diane Lepley; Amy Deutschendorf Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2017-10-02 Impact factor: 5.128