BACKGROUND: Studying surgical secondary events is an evolving effort with no current established system for database design, standard reporting, or definitions. Using the Clavien-Dindo classification as a guide, in 2001 we developed a Surgical Secondary Events database based on grade of event and required intervention to begin prospectively recording and analyzing all surgical secondary events (SSE). METHODS: Events are prospectively entered into the database by attending surgeons, house staff, and research staff. In 2008 we performed a blinded external audit of 1,498 operations that were randomly selected to examine the quality and reliability of the data. RESULTS: Of 4,284 operations, 1,498 were audited during the third quarter of 2008. Of these operations, 79 % (N = 1,180) did not have a secondary event while 21 % (N = 318) had an identified event; 91 % of operations (1,365) were correctly entered into the SSE database. Also 97 % (129 of 133) of missed secondary events were grades I and II. There were 3 grade III (2 %) and 1 grade IV (1 %) secondary event that were missed. There were no missed grade 5 secondary events. CONCLUSIONS: Grade III-IV events are more accurately collected than grade I-II events. Robust and accurate secondary events data can be collected by clinicians and research staff, and these data can safely be used for quality improvement projects and research.
BACKGROUND: Studying surgical secondary events is an evolving effort with no current established system for database design, standard reporting, or definitions. Using the Clavien-Dindo classification as a guide, in 2001 we developed a Surgical Secondary Events database based on grade of event and required intervention to begin prospectively recording and analyzing all surgical secondary events (SSE). METHODS: Events are prospectively entered into the database by attending surgeons, house staff, and research staff. In 2008 we performed a blinded external audit of 1,498 operations that were randomly selected to examine the quality and reliability of the data. RESULTS: Of 4,284 operations, 1,498 were audited during the third quarter of 2008. Of these operations, 79 % (N = 1,180) did not have a secondary event while 21 % (N = 318) had an identified event; 91 % of operations (1,365) were correctly entered into the SSE database. Also 97 % (129 of 133) of missed secondary events were grades I and II. There were 3 grade III (2 %) and 1 grade IV (1 %) secondary event that were missed. There were no missed grade 5 secondary events. CONCLUSIONS: Grade III-IV events are more accurately collected than grade I-II events. Robust and accurate secondary events data can be collected by clinicians and research staff, and these data can safely be used for quality improvement projects and research.
Authors: Stephen R Grobmyer; Fredric M Pieracci; Peter J Allen; Murray F Brennan; David P Jaques Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: S F Khuri; J Daley; W Henderson; K Hur; J Demakis; J B Aust; V Chong; P J Fabri; J O Gibbs; F Grover; K Hammermeister; G Irvin; G McDonald; E Passaro; L Phillips; F Scamman; J Spencer; J F Stremple Journal: Ann Surg Date: 1998-10 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Steven M Steinberg; Michael R Popa; Judith A Michalek; Matthew J Bethel; E Christopher Ellison Journal: Surgery Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Shukri F Khuri; William G Henderson; Jennifer Daley; Olga Jonasson; R Scott Jones; Darrell A Campbell; Aaron S Fink; Robert M Mentzer; Leigh Neumayer; Karl Hammermeister; Cecilia Mosca; Nancy Healey Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Campbell S D Roxburgh; Paul Strombom; Patricio Lynn; Mithat Gonen; Philip B Paty; Jose G Guillem; Garrett M Nash; J Joshua Smith; Iris Wei; Emmanouil Pappou; Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Martin R Weiser Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-04-08 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Luke V Selby; Daniel D Sjoberg; Danielle Cassella; Mindy Sovel; Martin R Weiser; Kent Sepkowitz; David R Jones; Vivian E Strong Journal: J Surg Res Date: 2015-03-06 Impact factor: 2.192
Authors: Luke V Selby; Emily A Vertosick; Daniel D Sjoberg; Mark A Schattner; Yelena Y Janjigian; Murray F Brennan; Daniel G Coit; Vivian E Strong Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-02-16 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Luke V Selby; Mindy Sovel; Daniel D Sjoberg; Margaret McSweeney; Damon Douglas; David R Jones; Peter T Scardino; Gerald A Soff; Nicola Fabbri; Kent Sepkowitz; Vivian E Strong; Inderpal S Sarkaria Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2015-12-15 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Luke V Selby; Ronald P DeMatteo; Renee M Tholey; William R Jarnagin; Julio Garcia-Aguilar; Paul D Strombom; Peter J Allen; T Peter Kingham; Martin R Weiser; Murray F Brennan; Vivian E Strong Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Jill H Tseng; Renee A Cowan; Qin Zhou; Alexia Iasonos; Maureen Byrne; Tracy Polcino; Clarissa Polen-De; Ginger J Gardner; Yukio Sonoda; Oliver Zivanovic; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Kara Long Roche; Dennis S Chi Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2018-08-17 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Jennifer J Mueller; Qin C Zhou; Alexia Iasonos; Roisin E O'Cearbhaill; Farah A Alvi; Amr El Haraki; Ane Gerda Zahl Eriksson; Ginger J Gardner; Yukio Sonoda; Douglas A Levine; Carol Aghajanian; Dennis S Chi; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; Oliver Zivanovic Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-01-09 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Jill H Tseng; Rudy S Suidan; Oliver Zivanovic; Ginger J Gardner; Yukio Sonoda; Douglas A Levine; Nadeem R Abu-Rustum; William P Tew; Dennis S Chi; Kara Long Roche Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-06-04 Impact factor: 5.482