Literature DB >> 27842731

The HARM score for gastrointestinal surgery: Application and validation of a novel, reliable and simple tool to measure surgical quality and outcomes.

Benjamin P Crawshaw1, Deborah S Keller1, Justin T Brady1, Knut M Augestad1, Nicholas K Schiltz2, Siran M Koroukian2, Suparna M Navale2, Scott R Steele1, Conor P Delaney3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The HospitAl length of stay, Readmissions and Mortality (HARM) score is a simple, inexpensive quality tool, linked directly to patient outcomes. We assess the HARM score for measuring surgical quality across multiple surgical populations.
METHODS: Upper gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary, and colorectal surgery cases between 2005 and 2009 were identified from the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project California State Inpatient Database. Composite and individual HARM scores were calculated from length of stay, 30-day readmission and mortality, correlated to complication rates for each hospital and stratified by operative type.
RESULTS: 71,419 admissions were analyzed. Higher HARM scores correlated with higher complication rates for all cases after risk adjustment and stratification by operation type, elective or emergent status.
CONCLUSIONS: The HARM score is a simple and valid quality measurement for upper gastrointestinal, hepatobiliary and colorectal surgery. The HARM score could facilitate benchmarking to improve patient outcomes and resource utilization, and may facilitate outcome improvement.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Colorectal; Hepatobiliary; Outcomes

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27842731     DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.11.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg        ISSN: 0002-9610            Impact factor:   2.565


  5 in total

1.  Application of a simple, affordable quality metric tool to colorectal, upper gastrointestinal, hernia, and hepatobiliary surgery patients: the HARM score.

Authors:  Justin T Brady; Bona Ko; Samuel F Hohmann; Benjamin P Crawshaw; Jennifer A Leinicke; Scott R Steele; Knut M Augestad; Conor P Delaney
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2017-12-27       Impact factor: 4.584

2.  Results of laparoscopic resection in high-risk rectal cancer patients.

Authors:  Sofoklis Panteleimonitis; Nuno Figueiredo; Thakshyanee Bhuvanakrishna; Mick Harper; Amjad Parvaiz
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 3.445

3.  Application of HARM Score to Measure Surgical Quality and Outcomes in Bariatric Patients.

Authors:  Michał R Janik; Rami R Mustafa; Tomasz G Rogula; Adel Alhaj Saleh; Mujjahid Abbas; Leena Khaitan
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 4.129

4.  Robotic rectal cancer surgery in obese patients may lead to better short-term outcomes when compared to laparoscopy: a comparative propensity scored match study.

Authors:  Sofoklis Panteleimonitis; Oliver Pickering; Hassan Abbas; Mick Harper; Ngianga Kandala; Nuno Figueiredo; Tahseen Qureshi; Amjad Parvaiz
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2018-03-25       Impact factor: 2.571

5.  Short-term clinical outcomes of a European training programme for robotic colorectal surgery.

Authors:  Sofoklis Panteleimonitis; Danilo Miskovic; Rachelle Bissett-Amess; Nuno Figueiredo; Matthias Turina; Giuseppe Spinoglio; Richard J Heald; Amjad Parvaiz
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2020-12-07       Impact factor: 4.584

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.