Dataset Information

Association of an Enhanced Recovery Pilot With Length of Stay in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

ABSTRACT: Importance:Enhanced recovery protocols (ERPs) are standardized care plans of best practices that can decrease morbidity and length of stay (LOS). However, many hospitals need help with implementation. The Enhanced Recovery in National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ERIN) pilot was designed to support ERP implementation. Objective:To evaluate the association of the ERIN pilot with LOS after colectomy. Design, Setting, and Participants:Using a difference-in-differences design, pilot LOS before and after ERP implementation was compared with matched controls in a hierarchical model, adjusting for case mix and random effects of hospitals and matched pairs. The setting was 15 hospitals of varied size and academic status from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Preimplementation and postimplementation colectomy cases (July 1, 2013, to December 31, 2015) were collected using novel ERIN variables. Emergency and septic cases were excluded. A propensity score match identified a 2:1 control cohort of patients undergoing colectomy at non-ERIN hospitals. Interventions:Pilot hospitals developed and implemented ERPs that included expert guidance, multidisciplinary teams, data audits, and opportunities for collaboration. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary outcome was LOS, and the secondary outcome was serious morbidity or mortality composite. Results:There were 4975 colectomies performed by 15 ERIN pilot hospitals (3437 before implementation and 1538 after implementation) compared with a control cohort of 9950 colectomies (4726 before implementation and 5224 after implementation). The mean LOS decreased by 1.7 days in the pilot (6.9 [interquartile range (IQR), 4-8] days before implementation vs 5.2 [IQR, 3-6] days after implementation, P < .001) compared with 0.4 day in controls (6.4 [IQR, 4-7] days before implementation vs 6.0 [IQR, 3-7] days after implementation, P < .001). Readmission did not differ pre-post for the pilot or controls. Serious morbidity or mortality decreased for pilot participants (485 [14.1%] before implementation vs 162 [10.5%] after implementation, P < .001), with no difference in controls, and remained significant after risk adjustment (adjusted odds ratio, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.60-0.96). After adjusting for differences in case mix and for clustering in hospitals and matched pairs, the adjusted difference-in-differences model demonstrated a decrease in LOS by 1.1 days in the pilot over controls (P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:Participating ERIN pilot hospitals achieved shorter LOS and decreased complications after elective colectomy, without increasing readmissions. The ability to implement ERPs across hospitals of varied size and resources is essential. Lessons from the ERIN pilot may inform efforts to scale this effective and evidence-based intervention.

SUBMITTER: Berian JR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5933392 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and purposePublished data regarding embolic protection device efficacy is mixed, and its use during carotid artery stent placement remains variable. We, therefore, examined the frequency of embolic protection device use and its association with outcomes after carotid artery stent placement using a national quality improvement data base.Materials and methodsPatients undergoing carotid artery stent placement with or without embolic protection devices were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data base. The primary outcome was the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (defined as death, stroke, or myocardial infarction/arrhythmia) within 30 days. Propensity scoring was used to create 2 matching cohorts of patients using demographic and baseline variables.ResultsBetween 2011 and 2018, among 1200 adult patients undergoing carotid artery stent placement, 23.8% did not have embolic protection devices. There was no trend toward increased embolic protection device use with time. Patients without embolic protection device use received preoperative antiplatelets less frequently (90.6% versus 94.6%, P = .02), underwent more emergent carotid artery stent placement (7.2% versus 3.6%, P = .01), and had a higher incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events (OR = 1.81; 95% CI, 1.11-2.94) and stroke (OR = 3.31; 95% CI, 1.71-6.39). After compensating for baseline imbalances using propensity-matched cohorts (n = 261 for both), carotid artery stent placement without an embolic protection device remained associated with increased major adverse cardiovascular events (9.2% versus 4.2%; OR = 2.30; 95% CI, 1.10-4.80) and stroke (6.5% versus 1.5%; OR = 4.48; 95% CI, 1.49-13.49).ConclusionsLack of embolic protection device use during carotid artery stent placement is associated with a 4-fold increase in the likelihood of perioperative stroke. Nevertheless, nearly one-quarter of patients in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program underwent unprotected carotid artery stent placement. Efforts targeting improved embolic protection device use during carotid artery stent placement are warranted.

Project description:ObjectivesIn a single-center cohort of surgical patients, we assessed the association between postoperative change in serum creatinine and adverse outcomes and compared the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program's definition for acute kidney injury with consensus risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage kidney and Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes definitions.DesignRetrospective single-center cohort.SettingAcademic tertiary medical center.PatientsTwenty-seven thousand eight hundred forty-one adult patients with no previous history of chronic kidney disease undergoing major surgery.InterventionsRisk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage kidney defines acute kidney injury as change in serum creatinine greater than or equal to 50% while Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes uses 0.3 mg/dL change from the reference serum creatinine. Since National Surgical Quality Improvement Program defines acute kidney injury as serum creatinine change greater than 2 mg/dL, it may underestimate the risk associated with less severe acute kidney injury.Measurements and main resultsThe optimal discrimination limits for both percent and absolute serum creatinine changes were calculated by maximizing sensitivity and specificity along the receiver operating characteristic curves for postoperative complications and mortality. Although prevalence of risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage kidney-acute kidney injury was 37%, only 7% of risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage kidney-acute kidney injury patients would be diagnosed with acute kidney injury using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program definition. In multivariable logistic models, patients with risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage kidney or Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes-acute kidney injury had a 10 times higher odds of dying compared to patients without acute kidney injury. The optimal discrimination limits for change in serum creatinine associated with adverse postoperative outcomes were as low as 0.2 mg/dL while the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program discrimination limit of 2.0 mg/dL had low sensitivity (0.05-0.28).ConclusionsCurrent American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program definition underestimates the risk associated with mild and moderate acute kidney injury otherwise captured by the consensus risk, injury, failure, loss, and end-stage kidney and Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes criteria.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Patients managed nonoperatively have been excluded from risk-adjusted benchmarking programs, including the American College of Surgeons (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP). Consequently, optimal performance evaluation is not possible for specialties like emergency general surgery (EGS) where nonoperative management is common. We developed a multi-institutional EGS clinical data registry within ACS NSQIP that includes patients managed nonoperatively to evaluate variability in nonoperative care across hospitals and identify gaps in performance assessment that occur when only operative cases are considered. METHODS:Using ACS NSQIP infrastructure and methodology, surgical consultations for acute appendicitis, acute cholecystitis, and small bowel obstruction (SBO) were sampled at 13 hospitals that volunteered to participate in the EGS clinical data registry. Standard NSQIP variables and 16 EGS-specific variables were abstracted with 30-day follow-up. To determine the influence of complications in nonoperative patients, rates of adverse outcomes were identified, and hospitals were ranked by performance with and then without including nonoperative cases. RESULTS:Two thousand ninety-one patients with EGS diagnoses were included, 46.6% with appendicitis, 24.3% with cholecystitis, and 29.1% with SBO. The overall rate of nonoperative management was 27.4%, 6.6% for appendicitis, 16.5% for cholecystitis, and 69.9% for SBO. Despite comprising only 27.4% of patients in the EGS pilot, nonoperative management accounted for 67.7% of deaths, 34.3% of serious morbidities, and 41.8% of hospital readmissions. After adjusting for patient characteristics and hospital diagnosis mix, addition of nonoperative management to hospital performance assessment resulted in 12 of 13 hospitals changing performance rank, with four hospitals changing by three or more positions. CONCLUSION:This study identifies a gap in performance evaluation when nonoperative patients are excluded from surgical quality assessment and demonstrates the feasibility of incorporating nonoperative care into existing surgical quality initiatives. Broadening the scope of hospital performance assessment to include nonoperative management creates an opportunity to improve the care of all surgical patients, not just those who have an operation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Care management, level IV; Epidemiologic, level III.

Dataset Information

Association of an Enhanced Recovery Pilot With Length of Stay in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets