Risk Prediction Accuracy Differs for Transferred and Nontransferred Emergency General Surgery Cases in the ACS-NSQIP

被引:5
|
作者
Castillo-Angeles, Manuel [1 ,2 ]
Jarman, Molly P. [2 ]
Uribe-Leitz, Tarsicio [2 ]
Jin, Ginger [2 ]
Salim, Ali [1 ,2 ]
Havens, Joaquim M. [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Surg, Div Trauma Burn & Surg Crit Care, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Surg, Ctr Surg & Publ Hlth, 75 Francis St, Boston, MA 02115 USA
关键词
Transfer; Emergency general surgery; Accuracy; Risk calculator; INTERHOSPITAL TRANSFER; SURGICAL QUALITY; UNITED-STATES; OUTCOMES; BURDEN;
D O I
10.1016/j.jss.2019.10.007
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Risk prediction accuracy of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) Surgical Risk Calculator has been shown to differ between emergency and elective surgery. Benchmarking methods of clinical performance require accurate risk estimation, and current methods rarely account for admission source; therefore, our goal was to assess whether the ACS-NSQIP predicts mortality comparably between transferred and nontransferred emergency general surgery (EGS) cases. Materials and methods: This is a retrospective study using the ACS-NSQIP database from 2005 to 2014including all inpatients who underwent one of seven previously described EGS procedures. The admission source was classified as directly admitted versus transferred from an outside emergency room or an acute care facility. We compared the accuracy of ACS-NSQIPepredicted mortality probabilities using the observed-to-expected (O:E) ratio and Brier score. A subgroup analysis was performed to compare accuracy of high-risk and low-risk procedures. Results: A total of 206,103 EGS admissions were identified, of which 6.97% were transfers. Overall mortality was 3.26% for the entire cohort and 10.24% within the transfer group. The O:E ratios generated by ACS-NSQIP models differed between transferred patients (O:E = 1.0, 95% confidence interval = 0.97-1.02) and nontransferred patients (O:E = 1.12, 95% confidence interval = 1.09-1.14). The Brier score for transferred patients was greater than that for nontransferred patients (0.063 versus 0.018, respectively) showing higher accuracy for nontransferred patients. Conclusions: The ACS-NSQIP risk estimates used for benchmarking differ between transferred and nontransferred EGS cases. Analyses of the Brier score by the ACS-NSQIP risk calculator demonstrated inferior prediction for transferred patients. This increased burden on accepting institutions will have an impact on quality metrics and should be considered for benchmarking of clinical performance. (C) 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:364 / 371
页数:8
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [1] Risk Prediction Accuracy Differs for Emergency Versus Elective Cases in the ACS-NSQIP
    Hyder, Joseph A.
    Reznor, Gally
    Wakeam, Elliot
    Nguyen, Louis L.
    Lipsitz, Stuart R.
    Havens, Joaquim M.
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2016, 264 (06) : 959 - 965
  • [2] Independent Operating by General Surgery Residents: An ACS-NSQIP Analysis
    Dickinson, Karen J.
    Bass, Barbara L.
    Graviss, Edward A.
    Nguyen, Duc T.
    Pei, Kevin Y.
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL EDUCATION, 2021, 78 (06) : 2001 - 2010
  • [3] BMI and VTE Risk in Emergency General Surgery, Does Size Matter? An ACS-NSQIP Database Analysis
    Pahlkotter, Maranda K.
    Mohidul, Shalwa
    Moen, Micaela R.
    Digney, Bradley W.
    Holmes, Sharon
    Muertos, Keely
    Sciarretta, Jason D.
    Davis, John M.
    AMERICAN SURGEON, 2020, 86 (12) : 1660 - 1665
  • [4] Transferred Emergency General Surgery Patients Are at Increased Risk of Death: A NSQIP Propensity Score Matched Analysis
    Castillo-Angeles, Manuel
    Uribe-Leitz, Tarsicio
    Jarman, Molly
    Jin, Ginger
    Feeney, Timothy
    Salim, Ali
    Havens, Joaquim M.
    JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS, 2019, 228 (06) : 871 - 877
  • [5] Evaluation of the Performance of ACS NSQIP Surgical Risk Calculator in Emergency General Surgery Patients
    Long, Andrea M.
    Hildreth, Amy N.
    Davis, Patrick T.
    Ur, Rebecca
    Badger, Ashley T.
    Miller, Preston R.
    AMERICAN SURGEON, 2020, 86 (02) : 83 - 89
  • [6] Assessing Readmission After General, Vascular, and Thoracic Surgery Using ACS-NSQIP
    Lucas, Donald J.
    Haider, Adil
    Haut, Elliot
    Dodson, Rebecca
    Wolfgang, Christopher L.
    Ahuja, Nita
    Sweeney, John
    Pawlik, Timothy M.
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2013, 258 (03) : 430 - 439
  • [7] Life after 90: Predictors of mortality and performance of the ACS-NSQIP risk calculator in 4,724 nonagenarian patients undergoing emergency general surgery
    Kongwibulwut, Manasnun
    Chiang, Kevin
    Lee, Jae Moo
    Eid, Ahmed I.
    Kongkaewpaisan, Napaporn
    Han, Kelsey
    Nordestgaard, Ask Tybjaerg
    King, David
    Saillant, Noelle
    Mendoza, April E.
    Velmahos, George
    Kaafarani, Haytham M. A.
    JOURNAL OF TRAUMA AND ACUTE CARE SURGERY, 2019, 86 (05) : 853 - 857
  • [8] Evaluation of ACS-NSQIP and CR-POSSUM risk calculators for the prediction of mortality after colorectal surgery: A retrospective cohort study
    Vashistha, Nitin
    Singhal, Siddharth
    Budhiraja, Sandeep
    Singhal, Dinesh
    JOURNAL OF MINIMAL ACCESS SURGERY, 2024, 20 (02) : 142 - 147
  • [9] Readmission After Emergency General Surgery: NSQIP Review of Risk, Cause and Ideal Follow-Up
    Rossi, Isolina R.
    Ross, Samuel W.
    May, Addison K.
    Reinke, Caroline E.
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL RESEARCH, 2021, 260 : 359 - 368
  • [10] Prediction Model for the Need of Postoperative Organ Support in an Adult Population Undergoing Elective Major General Surgery - Utilizing the American College of Surgeons - National Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) Surgical Risk Calculator
    Botejue, Kavya Galle Kankanamge
    Pathirana, Aloka
    Prathapan, Shamini
    SRI LANKAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY, 2023, 31 (02): : 136 - 143