Association Between Antibiotic Redosing Before Incision and Risk of Incisional Site Infection in Children With Appendicitis

The past, present and future of ACS NSQIP-Pediatric: Evolution from a quality registry to a comparative quality performance platform

Quality and process improvement (QI/PI) in children's surgical care require reliable data across the care continuum. Since 2012, the American College of Surgeons' (ACS) National Surgical Quality Improvement Program-Pediatric (NSQIP-Pediatric) has supported QI/PI by providing participating hospitals with risk-adjusted, comparative data regarding postoperative outcomes for multiple surgical specialties. To advance this goal over the past decade, iterative changes have been introduced to case inclusion and data collection, analysis and reporting. New datasets for specific procedures, such as appendectomy, spinal fusion for scoliosis, vesicoureteral reflux procedures, and tracheostomy in children less than 2 years old, have incorporated additional risk factors and outcomes to enhance the clinical relevance of data, and resource utilization to consider healthcare value. Recently, process measures for urgent surgical diagnoses and surgical antibiotic prophylaxis variables have been developed to promote timely and appropriate care. While a mature program, NSQIP-Pediatric remains dynamic and responsive to meet the needs of the surgical community. Future directions include introduction of variables and analyses to address patient-centered care and healthcare equity.

Defining high-quality care in pediatric surgery: Implications for performance measurement and prioritization of quality and process improvement efforts

Establishing a standardized and comprehensive framework for defining surgical quality is essential for meaningful performance measurement and process improvement efforts. The goal of this chapter is to provide a conceptual framework for defining surgical quality based on the perspectives of relevant stakeholders, and to identify infrastructure and care processes necessary for the delivery of high-quality surgical care. Central to this framework are the complementary approaches for quality assessment as outlined by the Institute of Medicine and Donabedian paradigms, and how these should be used together to develop a robust and granular taxonomy of quality constructs relevant to all surgical conditions. The utility of balancing and composite measures for quality assessment is also reviewed, as are practical considerations for identifying and prioritizing process improvement opportunities based on procedure volume and perioperative risk.