Establishing quality in colorectal surgery

Differences in organization of care are associated with mortality, severe complication and failure to rescue in emergency colon cancer surgery

Background

Emergency colon cancer surgery is associated with increased mortality and complication risk, which can be due to differences in the organization of hospital care. This study aimed.

Objective

To explore which structural factors in the preoperative, perioperative and postoperative periods influence outcomes after emergency colon cancer surgery.

Methods

An observational study was performed in 30 Dutch hospitals. Medical records from 1738 patients operated in the period 2012 till 2015 were reviewed on the type of referral, intensive care unit (ICU) level, surgeon specialization and experience, duration of surgery and operating room time, blood loss, stay on specialized postoperative ward, complication occurrence, reintervention and day of surgery and linked to case-mix data available in the Dutch Colorectal Audit. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to estimate the influence of these factors on 30-day mortality, severe complication and failure to rescue (FTR), after adjustment for case-mix.

Results

Patients operated by a non-Gastro intestinal/oncology specialized surgeon have significantly increased mortality (Odds Ratio (OR) 2.28 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.23–4.23]) and severe complication risk (OR 1.61 [95% CI 1.08–2.39]). Also, duration of stay in the operating room was significantly associated with increased risk on severe complication (OR 1.03 [95% CI 1.01–1.06]). Patients admitted to a non-specialized ward have significantly increased mortality (OR 2.25 [95% CI 1.46–3.47]) and FTR risk (OR 2.39 [95% CI 1.52–3.75]). A low ICU level (basic ICU) was associated with a lower severe complication risk (OR 0.72 [95% CI 0.52–1.00]). Surgery on Tuesday was associated with a higher mortality risk (OR 2.82 [95% CI 1.24–6.40]) and a severe complication risk (OR 1.77, [95% CI 1.19–2.65]).

Conclusion

This study identified a non-specialized surgeon and ward, operating room, time and day of surgery to be risk factors for worse outcomes in emergency colon cancer surgery.

Outcomes following colorectal cancer surgery: Results from a population-based study in Queensland, Australia, using quality indicators

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is one of the most common cancers diagnosed worldwide, and rates are continuing to rise. Surgery is the primary treatment for CRC, and our aim was to examine clinical outcomes following major resection using a series of established quality indicators and to identify factors associated with poor clinical outcomes.

METHOD

This population-based retrospective study included 4321 patients with diagnosed with CRC in 2012 and 2014 in Queensland, Australia, who underwent a major resection. Primary outcomes included in-hospital mortality, 30-day unplanned readmission, extended hospital stay (>21 days), and 30- and 90-day mortality. Multivariable logistic regression modelling was conducted to establish factors independently associated with each outcome of interest.

RESULTS

Overall, in-hospital mortality was 1.5%, 3.0% had an unplanned readmission, 8% had an extended hospital stay, and 30- and 90-day postoperative mortality was 1.6% and 3.1%, respectively. After adjustment, we found that factors such as older age, presence of comorbidities, emergency admission, and stoma formation were significantly associated with poorer outcomes with these findings being consistent across each of the outcomes of interest. In addition to these factors, the risk of 90-day mortality was significantly elevated for patients with advanced stage disease (OR = 1.95, CI 1.35-2.82). Sex, primary site, hospital volume, residential location, nor socioeconomic status was found to be associated with any of the outcomes of interest.

CONCLUSION

Overall, the risk of poorer clinical outcomes for CRC patients in Queensland, Australia, is low. There is however a subgroup of patients at particularly elevated risk of poorer outcomes following CRC. Strategies to reduce the poorer clinical outcomes this group of patients experience should be explored.

Surgeon perceived most important factors to achieve the best hospital performance on colorectal cancer surgery: a Dutch modified Delphi method

OBJECTIVES

Hospital variation in risk-adjusted outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery has been shown. However, explanatory factors are not sufficiently clear. The objective of this study was to identify factors perceived by gastrointestinal surgeons as important to achieve excellent casemix-adjusted outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery.

DESIGN

Based on literature and experts' opinion, 86 factors associated with serious complications, failure to rescue and mortality were listed. These were presented to gastrointestinal surgeons through two web-based surveys and an expert meeting. Participants were asked to choose their top 10 of most important factors.

PARTICIPANTS

Dutch gastrointestinal surgeons (n=52) of different hospitals and different hospital types (general/teaching/academic).

RESULTS

Of 31 invited experts for the first survey and meeting, 71% responded. Of 130 invited surgeons, 34 responded to the second survey. Factors deemed important were: procedural hospital volume (46% in top 10), specialised surgeons performing surgery, (elective 87%, emergency 60% and reoperations 62% in top 10), accessibility of, and daily ward rounds by specialised surgeons (41% and 38% in top 10), preoperative screening for malnutrition (57% in top 10), a protocol for recognition of anastomotic leakage and rapid reintervention (54% and 49% in top 10).

CONCLUSION

Procedural hospital volume, specialisation of surgeons, screening for malnutrition, early recognition of complications followed by rapid action were perceived as most important factors to achieve good outcomes by gastrointestinal surgeons.

Time to rethink surgeon-specific outcome data for colorectal surgeons in England: Cross-sectional data of 73,842 resections for colorectal cancer

Since 2013, individual surgeon and NHS Trusts outcomes following elective colorectal cancer surgery have been in the public domain in England. The 90-day operative mortality rates following colorectal resections are available for the public to view online.

AIM

The aim of this study is to evaluate the quality of the published data. It also aims to find whether this data will show the expected pattern of inverse correlation between case volume and the postoperative 90-day mortality rate.

METHODOLOGY

The postoperative 90-day mortality data was taken from the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) website. Surgeons and Trusts were categorized according to case volume. Completeness of data at Trust and surgeon levels was analysed. All statistical analyses were performed in Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS, version 23, IBM, Armonk, NY).

RESULTS

788 colorectal surgeons performed 73,842 resections for colorectal cancer in 143 hospitals over a 5-year period (1st April 2010 and 31st March 2015). The mean national 90-day mortality after colorectal resections was 2.6%. No significant effect was identified when mortality rates were correlated with the surgeon or Trust volume. There was a missing data of 3874 patients in the individual surgeon level analysis when compared to the number of procedures included in Trust analysis (73,842 vs 69,968 cases). About one-third of hospitals (n = 43) had a case ascertainment of less than 90%. Out of the 788 surgeons, there were only two outliers whose mortality rates were outside the "funnel limit".

CONCULSION

The expected relationship between case volume and mortality rates could not be established. The completeness of data and low numbers of procedures per surgeon are major concerns. Additional outcome metrics should be utilized to assess performance quality. Failure to Rescue approach should be explored and utilized. It is crucial to have more rigorous and streamlined methods for data collection and case ascertainment to present to the public reliable, complete and relevant data.

Reliability and validity assessment of administrative databases in measuring the quality of rectal cancer management

PURPOSE

Measurement and monitoring of the quality of care using a core set of quality measures are increasing in health service research. Although administrative databases include limited clinical data, they offer an attractive source for quality measurement. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to evaluate the completeness of different administrative data sources compared to a clinical survey in evaluating rectal cancer cases.

METHODS

Between May 2012 and November 2014, a clinical survey was done on 498 Lombardy patients who had rectal cancer and underwent surgical resection. These collected data were compared with the information extracted from administrative sources including Hospital Discharge Dataset, drug database, daycare activity data, fee-exemption database, and regional screening program database. The agreement evaluation was performed using a set of 12 quality indicators.

RESULTS

Patient complexity was a difficult indicator to measure for lack of clinical data. Preoperative staging was another suboptimal indicator due to the frequent missing administrative registration of tests performed. The agreement between the 2 data sources regarding chemoradiotherapy treatments was high. Screening detection, minimally invasive techniques, length of stay, and unpreventable readmissions were detected as reliable quality indicators. Postoperative morbidity could be a useful indicator but its agreement was lower, as expected.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthcare administrative databases are large and real-time collected repositories of data useful in measuring quality in a healthcare system. Our investigation reveals that the reliability of indicators varies between them. Ideally, a combination of data from both sources could be used in order to improve usefulness of less reliable indicators.

Short-term outcomes after surgical resection for colorectal cancer in South Australia

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVE

Short-term outcomes (unplanned readmission, post-surgical complication rates, 30-day and 90-day post-surgical mortality) are often used as indicators of quality of surgical care for colorectal cancer (CRC). Differences in these immediate outcomes can highlight disparities in care across patient subpopulations. This study aimed to document short-term outcomes following major surgery for CRC and to identify whether there were any sociodemographic differences across South Australia (SA).

METHODS

This population-based study included all CRC resections among SA residents diagnosed with CRC aged 50-79 years in 2003-2008 (n = 3940). Clinical, treatment, comorbidity and outcomes data were compiled through linkage of administrative and surveillance datasets across SA. A retrospective cohort design was used to examine short-term outcomes including post-operative complications, 28-day emergency readmission and 30-day and 90-day mortality. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with each outcome.

RESULTS

Post-operative complications occurred in 28% of cases. Thirty-day and ninety-day mortality were 1.3% and 3%, respectively. Later stage, older age, multiple comorbidities and emergency admissions were associated with poorer short-term outcomes. Risk of complications was lower among patients from higher socio-economic areas (OR = 0.77, 95%CI 0.62-0.98). Risk of 30-day mortality was higher among non-metropolitan patients (OR = 2.33, 95%CI 1.22-4.46). Post-operative complications increased the risk of emergency readmission and short-term mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term outcomes following CRC surgery may be improved through strategies to increase earlier detection and reduce emergency admissions. Socioeconomic and regional disparities require further examination of health system factors.

Reconciliation of international administrative coding systems for comparison of colorectal surgery outcome

AIM

Significant variation in colorectal surgery outcomes exists between different countries. Better understanding of the sources of variable outcomes using administrative data requires alignment of differing clinical coding systems. We aimed to map similar diagnoses and procedures across administrative coding systems used in different countries.

METHOD

Administrative data were collected in a central database as part of the Global Comparators (GC) Project. In order to unify these data, a systematic translation of diagnostic and procedural codes was undertaken. Codes for colorectal diagnoses, resections, operative complications and reoperative interventions were mapped across the respective national healthcare administrative coding systems. Discharge data from January 2006 to June 2011 for patients who had undergone colorectal surgical resections were analysed to generate risk-adjusted models for mortality, length of stay, readmissions and reoperations.

RESULTS

In all, 52 544 case records were collated from 31 institutions in five countries. Mapping of all the coding systems was achieved so that diagnosis and procedures from the participant countries could be compared. Using the aligned coding systems to develop risk-adjusted models, the 30-day mortality rate for colorectal surgery was 3.95% (95% CI 0.86-7.54), the 30-day readmission rate was 11.05% (5.67-17.61), the 28-day reoperation rate was 6.13% (3.68-9.66) and the mean length of stay was 14 (7.65-46.76) days.

CONCLUSION

The linkage of international hospital administrative data that we developed enabled comparison of documented surgical outcomes between countries. This methodology may facilitate international benchmarking.

The impact of shortened postgraduate surgical training on colorectal cancer outcome

BACKGROUND

Shortened postgraduate surgical training reforms, known as Calman, have altered delivery of surgical training in the UK with reduced working hours and training time aiming to produce a more subspecialised workforce.

AIMS

This study aims to compare rectal cancer surgical outcomes of Calman-trained consultants in a single institution to published data. Additionally, the study compared colorectal cancer surgical outcome between Calman-trained consultants (CTCs) and non-Calman consultants (NCTCs) in a national dataset.

METHODS

Local dataset Clinicopathological outcome of rectal cancer resection undertaken by CTCs in a single institution (2006-2010) were compared against NCTC counterparts. National dataset All elective colorectal cancer resections between 2004 and 2008 in English NHS hospitals were included. CTCs (present from 2004 onwards) were compared to NCTCs (present prior to 2004). Outcome measures included 30-day in-hospital mortality, reoperation and readmission rates.

RESULTS

Local dataset One hundred thirteen patients were operated under five CTC. The 30-day in-hospital mortality for CTCs (1%) was favourable compared to published rates (3-5%). Local recurrence rate (4.4%) was comparable to NCTC (3.6%). National dataset Between 2004 and 2008, 44,106 patients underwent elective colorectal resection. Multiple regression demonstrated CTC patients had a reduced length of stay and reduced reoperation rate. No difference in mortality and unplanned readmission rates were seen.

CONCLUSION

CTCs have similar safety outcome to NCTCs for colorectal cancer resection procedures. Further work is needed to assess the impact of further training reductions on clinical outcome.

Assessment of abdominoperineal resection rate as a surrogate marker of hospital quality in rectal cancer surgery

Background

Rates of abdominoperineal resection (APR) have been suggested as a solitary surrogate marker for comparing overall hospital quality in rectal cancer surgery. This study investigated the value of this marker by examining the associations between hospital APR rates and other quality indicators.

Methods

Hospital-level correlations between risk-adjusted APR rates for low rectal cancer and six risk-adjusted outcomes and six care processes were performed (such as 30-day mortality, complications, timely treatment). The ability of APR rates to discriminate between hospitals' performance was examined by means of hospital variance results in multilevel regression models and funnel plots.

Results

A linked population-based data set identified 1703 patients diagnosed in 2007 and 2008 who underwent surgery for rectal cancer. Some 15·9 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 14·2 to 17·6) per cent of these patients had an APR. Among 707 people with low rectal cancer, 38·2 (34·6 to 41·8) per cent underwent APR. Although risk-adjusted hospital rates of APR for low rectal cancer varied by up to 100 per cent, only one hospital (1 per cent) fell outside funnel plot limits and hospital variance in multilevel models was not very large. Lower hospital rates of APR for low rectal cancer did not correlate significantly with better hospital-level outcomes or process measures, except for recording of pathological stage (r = −0·55, P = 0·019). Patients were significantly more likely to undergo APR for low rectal cancer if they attended a non-tertiary metropolitan hospital (adjusted odds ratio 2·14, 95 per cent c.i. 1·11 to 4·15).

Conclusion

APR rates do not appear to be a useful surrogate marker of overall hospital performance in rectal cancer surgery.

Identifying important predictors for anastomotic leak after colon and rectal resection: prospective study on 616 patients

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify patient, clinical, and surgical factors that may predispose patients to anastomotic leak (AL) after large bowel surgery.

BACKGROUND

Anastomotic leak is still one of the most devastating complications following colorectal surgery. Knowledge about factors predisposing patients to AL is vital to its early detection, decision making for surgical time, managing preoperative risk factors, and postoperative complications.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational, quality improvement study in a cohort of 616 patients undergoing colorectal resection in a single institution with the main outcome being AL within 30 days postoperatively. Some of the predictor variables were age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), radiation and chemotherapy, immunomodulator medications, albumin, preoperative diagnoses, surgical procedure(s), surgical technique (laparoscopic vs open), anastomotic technique (staple vs handsewn), number of major arteries ligated at surgery, surgeon's experience, presence of infectious condition at surgery, intraoperative adverse events, and functional status using 36-Item Short Form General Health Survey.

RESULTS

Of the 616 patients, 53.4% were female. The median age of the patients was 63 years and the mean body mass index was 25.9 kg/m. Of them, 80.3% patients had laparoscopic surgery and 19.5% had open surgery. AL occurred in 5.7% (35) patients. In multivariate analysis, significant independent predictors for leak were anastomoses less than 10 cm from the anal verge, CCI of 3 or more, high inferior mesenteric artery ligation (above left colic artery), intraoperative complications, and being of the male sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple risk factors exist that predispose patients to ALs. These risk factors should be considered before and during the surgical care of colorectal patients.