Increasing the use of perioperative risk scoring in emergency laparotomy: nationwide quality improvement programme.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Emergency laparotomy is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The early identification of high-risk patients allows for timely perioperative care and appropriate resource allocation. The aim of this study was to develop a nationwide surgical trainee-led quality improvement (QI) programme to increase the use of perioperative risk scoring in emergency laparotomy.Methods
The programme was structured using the active implementation framework in 15 state-funded Irish hospitals to guide the staged implementation of perioperative risk scoring. The primary outcome was a recorded preoperative risk score for patients undergoing an emergency laparotomy at each site.Results
The rate of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy receiving a perioperative risk score increased from 0-11 per cent during the exploratory phase to 35-100 per cent during the full implementation phase. Crucial factors for implementing changes included an experienced central team providing implementation support, collaborator engagement, and effective communication and social relationships.Conclusions
A trainee-led QI programme increased the use of perioperative risk assessment in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, with the potential to improve patient outcomes and care delivery.
SUBMITTER: Nally DM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9309802 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomies in the U.K., U.S.A. and Denmark are known to have a high risk of death, with accompanying evidence of suboptimal care. The emergency laparotomy pathway quality improvement care (ELPQuiC) bundle is an evidence-based care bundle for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, consisting of: initial assessment with early warning scores, early antibiotics, interval between decision and operation less than 6?h, goal-directed fluid therapy and postoperative intensive care. METHODS: The ELPQuiC bundle was implemented in four hospitals, using locally identified strategies to assess the impact on risk-adjusted mortality. Comparison of case mix-adjusted 30-day mortality rates before and after care-bundle implementation was made using risk-adjusted cumulative sum (CUSUM) plots and a logistic regression model. RESULTS: Risk-adjusted CUSUM plots showed an increase in the numbers of lives saved per 100 patients treated in all hospitals, from 6.47 in the baseline interval (299 patients included) to 12.44 after implementation (427 patients included) (P?<?0.001). The overall case mix-adjusted risk of death decreased from 15.6 to 9.6 per cent (risk ratio 0.614, 95 per cent c.i. 0.451 to 0.836; P?=?0.002). There was an increase in the uptake of the ELPQuiC processes but no significant difference in the patient case-mix profile as determined by the mean Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality and morbidity risk (0.197 and 0.223 before and after implementation respectively; P?=?0.395). CONCLUSION: Use of the ELPQuiC bundle was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of death following emergency laparotomy.
| S-EPMC4312892 | biostudies-other
Project description:IntroductionThe Perioperative Quality Improvement Programme (PQIP) is designed to measure complications after major elective surgery and improve these through feedback of data to clinicians. Previous research suggests that despite the significant resources which go into collecting data for national clinical audits, the information they contain is not always used effectively to improve local services.Methods and analysisWe will conduct a formative process evaluation of PQIP comprising a multisited qualitative study to analyse PQIP's programme theory, barriers, facilitators and wider contextual factors that influence implementation. The research will be carried out with the PQIP project team and six National Health Service (NHS) Trusts in England, selected according to geographical location, type of hospital, size and level of engagement with PQIP. We will include one Trust which has not expressed interest in the PQIP for comparison and to explore the role of secular trend in any changes in practice. We will use semi-structured interviews (up to 144 in Trusts and 12 with the project team), non-participant observations (up to 150 ?hours) and documentary analysis. We will track the lifecycle of perioperative data, exploring the transformations it undergoes from creation to use. We will use framework analysis with categories both from our research questions and from themes emerging from the data.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval has been granted from the University College London Research Ethics Committee (ref 10375/001). Permissions to conduct research at NHS Trusts have been granted by local Research and Development offices in coordination with the Health Research Authority. We will follow guidelines for data security, confidentiality and information governance. Findings will be shared at regular time points with the PQIP project team to inform the implementation of the programme, and with participating NHS Trusts to help them reflect on how they currently use data for improvement of perioperative services.
| S-EPMC6624057 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionFew valid and reliable grading checklists have been published for the evaluation of performance during simulated high-stakes perioperative event management. As such, the purposes of this study were to construct valid scoring checklists for a variety of perioperative emergencies and to determine the reliability of scores produced by these checklists during continuous video review.MethodsA group of anesthesiologists, intensivists, and educators created a set of simulation grading checklists for the assessment of the following scenarios: severe anaphylaxis, cerebrovascular accident, hyperkalemic arrest, malignant hyperthermia, and acute coronary syndrome. Checklist items were coded as critical or noncritical. Nonexpert raters evaluated 10 simulation videos in a random order, with each video being graded 4 times. A group of faculty experts also graded the videos to create a reference standard to which nonexpert ratings were compared. P < 0.05 was considered significant.ResultsTeam leaders in the simulation videos were scored by the expert panel as having performed 56.5% of all items on the checklist (range, 43.8%-84.0%), and 67.2% of the critical items (range, 30.0%-100%). Nonexpert raters agreed with the expert assessment 89.6% of the time (95% confidence interval, 87.2%-91.6%). No learning curve development was found with repetitive video assessment or checklist use. The κ values comparing nonexpert rater assessments to the reference standard averaged 0.76 (95% confidence interval, 0.71-0.81).ConclusionsThe findings indicate that the grading checklists described are valid, are reliable, and could be used in perioperative crisis management assessment.
| S-EPMC4182114 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This project aimed to increase same-day emergency care (SDEC)-suitable activity within an existing ambulatory medical unit, in line with the recommendations set out in the NHS Long Term Plan. Prior to the project, much of the unit's activity was non-urgent and focused on supporting early discharges. Scoping exercises were undertaken to better understand current activity and identify interventions to increasing same-day referrals from within the urgent and emergency care system. Quality improvement methodology was then used to implement and study a variety of interventions, including but not limited to the development of new condition-based referral pathways. Retrospective review of SDEC activity demonstrated a threefold increase.
| S-EPMC11363703 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionLive video visits for ambulatory encounters offer potential benefits, including access to remote subspecialty services, care coordination between providers, and improved convenience for patients. We aimed to increase the utilization of video visits for pediatric patients at our medical center using an iterative quality improvement process.MethodsA multispecialty improvement team identified opportunities to increase video visit utilization and prioritized interventions using benefit-effort analyses. Interventions focused on 6 key drivers. The outcome measure was the percentage of ambulatory encounters conducted by video. The process measure was the percentage of ambulatory pediatricians conducting video visits. The balancing measure was the percentage of no-shows among scheduled video visits. All measures were analyzed using statistical process control.ResultsInterventions were associated with increases in our outcome and process measures from 0.1% to 1.2% and 0.6% to 6.3%, respectively, during the first 8 months. Subsequently, the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic was associated with further increases in these measures to 41.8% and 73.5%, respectively, over 3 months. The balancing measure increased from 0% at baseline to 14.7% with no special cause variation during the intervention period. The most impactful interventions included clinician training outreach, providing equipment, and streamlining MyChart patient enrollment.ConclusionsThis improvement project effectively increased pediatric ambulatory video visit utilization, although the most significant driver of utilization was the COVID-19 pandemic. Project interventions implemented before COVID-19 facilitated rapid video visit adoption during the pandemic. A similar improvement process may be beneficial for other medical centers aiming to improve video visit utilization.
| S-EPMC8225361 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Rates of damage control laparotomy (DCL) vary widely and consensus on appropriate indications does not exist. The purposes of this multicenter quality improvement (QI) project were to decrease the use of DCL and to identify indications where consensus exists. METHODS:In 2016, six US Level I trauma centers performed a yearlong, QI project utilizing a single QI tool: audit and feedback. Each emergent trauma laparotomy was prospectively reviewed. Damage control laparotomy cases were adjudicated based on the majority vote of faculty members as being appropriate or potentially, in retrospect, safe for definitive laparotomy. The rate of DCL for 2 years prior (2014 and 2015) was retrospectively collected and used as a control. To account for secular trends of DCL, interrupted time series was used to effectiveness of the QI interventions. RESULTS:Eight hundred seventy-two emergent laparotomies were performed: 73% definitive laparotomies, 24% DCLs, and 3% intraoperative deaths. Of the 209 DCLs, 162 (78%) were voted appropriate, and 47 (22%) were voted to have been potentially safe for definitive laparotomy. Rates of DCL ranged from 16% to 34%. Common indications for DCL for which consensus existed were packing (103/115 [90%] appropriate) and hemodynamic instability (33/40 [83%] appropriate). The only common indication for which primary closure at the initial laparotomy could have been safely performed was avoiding a planned second look (16/32 [50%] appropriate). CONCLUSION:A single faceted QI intervention failed to decrease the rate of DCL at six US Level I trauma centers. However, opportunities for improvement in safely decreasing the rate of DCL were present. Second look laparotomy appears to lack consensus as an indication for DCL and may represent a target to decrease the rate of DCL after injury. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Epidemiological study with one negative criterion, level III.
| S-EPMC6771434 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) Surgical Safety Checklist has fostered safe practice for 10 years, yet its place in emergency surgery has not been assessed on a global scale. The aim of this study was to evaluate reported checklist use in emergency settings and examine the relationship with perioperative mortality in patients who had emergency laparotomy.MethodsIn two multinational cohort studies, adults undergoing emergency laparotomy were compared with those having elective gastrointestinal surgery. Relationships between reported checklist use and mortality were determined using multivariable logistic regression and bootstrapped simulation.ResultsOf 12 296 patients included from 76 countries, 4843 underwent emergency laparotomy. After adjusting for patient and disease factors, checklist use before emergency laparotomy was more common in countries with a high Human Development Index (HDI) (2455 of 2741, 89·6 per cent) compared with that in countries with a middle (753 of 1242, 60·6 per cent; odds ratio (OR) 0·17, 95 per cent c.i. 0·14 to 0·21, P < 0·001) or low (363 of 860, 42·2 per cent; OR 0·08, 0·07 to 0·10, P < 0·001) HDI. Checklist use was less common in elective surgery than for emergency laparotomy in high-HDI countries (risk difference -9·4 (95 per cent c.i. -11·9 to -6·9) per cent; P < 0·001), but the relationship was reversed in low-HDI countries (+12·1 (+7·0 to +17·3) per cent; P < 0·001). In multivariable models, checklist use was associated with a lower 30-day perioperative mortality (OR 0·60, 0·50 to 0·73; P < 0·001). The greatest absolute benefit was seen for emergency surgery in low- and middle-HDI countries.ConclusionChecklist use in emergency laparotomy was associated with a significantly lower perioperative mortality rate. Checklist use in low-HDI countries was half that in high-HDI countries.
| S-EPMC6492154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEmergency laparotomy carries a significant risk profile around the time of surgery. This research aimed to establish the feasibility of recruitment to a study using validated scoring tools to assess complications after surgery; and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to assess quality of life and quality of recovery up to a year following emergency laparotomy (EL).MethodsWe used our local National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) register to identify potential participants at a single NHS centre in England. Complications were assessed at 5, 10 and 30 days after EL. Patient-reported outcome measures were collected at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery using EQ5D and WHODAS 2.0 questionnaires.ResultsSeventy of 129 consecutive patients (54%) agreed to take part in the study. Post-operative morbidity survey data was recorded from 63 and 37 patients at postoperative day 5 and day 10. Accordion Complication Severity Grading data was obtained from 70 patients. Patient-reported outcome measures were obtained from patients at baseline and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery from 70, 59, 51, 48, to 42 patients (100%, 87%, 77%, 75% and 69% of survivors), respectively.ConclusionsThis study affirms the feasibility of collecting PROMs and morbidity data successfully at various time points following emergency laparotomy, and is the first longitudinal study to describe quality of life up to a year after surgery. This finding is important in the design of a larger observational study into quality of life and recovery after EL.
| S-EPMC8311937 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Laparotomy remains one of the commonest emergency surgical procedures. Early prognostic evaluation would aid in selecting the high-risk patients for an aggressive treatment. Awareness about risks could potentially contribute to the quality of perioperative care and optimum utilization of resources. Portsmouth modification of Physiological and operative severity for the enumeration of mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM) and the acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE-II) have been the most widely used scoring systems for emergency laparotomies. It is always better to have a single scoring system to predict outcomes and audit healthcare organizations. AIM:To compare the ability of APACHE-II and P-POSSUM to predict postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. METHODS:All patients undergoing emergency laparotomy at the Tata Main Hospital, Jamshedpur between December 2013 and November 2014 were included in the study. In this observational study, P-POSSUM and APACHE-II scoring were done, and the outcome analysis evaluated with mortality being the primary outcome. RESULTS:For P-POSSUM, at a cut off value of 63 to predict mortality using receiver operating characteristics curve analysis, the area under the curve was 0.989; and for APACHE-II, at the cut off value of 24, the area under the curve was 0.965. CONCLUSION:Because the ability of APACHE-II to predict mortality was similar to P-POSSUM and APACHE-II does not need scoring for intra-operative findings and histopathology reports, APACHE-II can be used pre-operatively to assess the risk in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. However, for audit purposes, either of the two scoring systems can be used.
| S-EPMC6718800 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePatients undergoing emergency laparotomy have high mortality, but few studies exist to improve outcomes for these patients.ObjectiveTo assess whether a collaborative approach to implement a 6-point care bundle is associated with reduction in mortality and length of stay and improvement in the delivery of standards of care across a group of hospitals.Design, setting, and participantsThe Emergency Laparotomy Collaborative (ELC) was a UK-based prospective quality improvement study of the implementation of a care bundle provided to patients requiring emergency laparotomy between October 1, 2015, and September 30, 2017. Participants were 28 National Health Service hospitals and emergency surgical patients who were treated at these hospitals and whose data were entered into the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) database. Post-ELC implementation outcomes were compared with baseline data from July 1, 2014, to September 30, 2015. Data entry and collection were performed through the NELA.InterventionsA 6-point, evidence-based care bundle was used. The bundle included prompt measurement of blood lactate levels, early review and treatment for sepsis, transfer to the operating room within defined time goals after the decision to operate, use of goal-directed fluid therapy, postoperative admission to an intensive care unit, and multidisciplinary involvement of senior clinicians in the decision and delivery of perioperative care. Change management and leadership coaching were provided to ELC leadership teams.Main outcome and measuresPrimary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, both crude and Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enumeration of Mortality and morbidity (P-POSSUM) risk-adjusted, and length of stay. Secondary outcomes were the changes after implementation of the separate metrics in the care bundle.ResultsA total of 28 hospitals participated in the ELC and completed the project. The baseline group included 5562 patients (2937 female [52.8%] and a mean [range] age of 65.3 [18.0-114.0] years), whereas the post-ELC group had 9247 patients (4911 female [53.1%] and a mean [range] age of 65.0 [18.0-99.0] years). Unadjusted mortality rate decreased from 9.8% at baseline to 8.3% in year 2 of the project, and so did risk-adjusted mortality from a baseline of 5.3% to 4.5% post-ELC. Mean length of stay decreased from 20.1 days during year 1 to 18.9 days during year 2. Significant changes in 5 of the 6 metrics in the care bundle were achieved.Conclusions and relevanceA collaborative approach using a quality improvement methodology and a care bundle appeared to be effective in reducing mortality and length of stay in emergency laparotomy, suggesting that hospitals should adopt such an approach to see better patient outcomes and care delivery performance.
| S-EPMC6537778 | biostudies-literature