Burnell, M;
Iyer, R;
Gentry-Maharaj, A;
Nordin, A;
Liston, R;
Manchanda, R;
Das, N;
... Menon, U; + view all
(2016)
Benchmarking of surgical complications in gynaecological oncology: prospective multicentre study.
BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
, 123
(13)
pp. 2171-2180.
10.1111/1471-0528.13994.
Preview |
Text
Gentry-Maharaj_Burnell et al_Benchmarking of surgical complications in gynaecological oncology_BJOG_2016.pdf Download (1MB) | Preview |
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of risk-adjustment on surgical complication rates (CRs) for benchmarking gynaecological oncology centres. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Ten UK accredited gynaecological oncology centres. POPULATION: Women undergoing major surgery on a gynaecological oncology operating list. METHODS: Patient co-morbidity, surgical procedures and intra-operative (IntraOp) complications were recorded contemporaneously by surgeons for 2948 major surgical procedures. Postoperative (PostOp) complications were collected from hospitals and patients. Risk-prediction models for IntraOp and PostOp complications were created using penalised (lasso) logistic regression using over 30 potential patient/surgical risk factors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Observed and risk-adjusted IntraOp and PostOp CRs for individual hospitals were calculated. Benchmarking using colour-coded funnel plots and observed-to-expected ratios was undertaken. RESULTS: Overall, IntraOp CR was 4.7% (95% CI 4.0-5.6) and PostOp CR was 25.7% (95% CI 23.7-28.2). The observed CRs for all hospitals were under the upper 95% control limit for both IntraOp and PostOp funnel plots. Risk-adjustment and use of observed-to-expected ratio resulted in one hospital moving to the >95-98% CI (red) band for IntraOp CRs. Use of only hospital-reported data for PostOp CRs would have resulted in one hospital being unfairly allocated to the red band. There was little concordance between IntraOp and PostOp CRs. CONCLUSION: The funnel plots and overall IntraOp (≈5%) and PostOp (≈26%) CRs could be used for benchmarking gynaecological oncology centres. Hospital benchmarking using risk-adjusted CRs allows fairer institutional comparison. IntraOp and PostOp CRs are best assessed separately. As hospital under-reporting is common for postoperative complications, use of patient-reported outcomes is important. TWEETABLE ABSTRACT: Risk-adjusted benchmarking of surgical complications for ten UK gynaecological oncology centres allows fairer comparison.
Type: | Article |
---|---|
Title: | Benchmarking of surgical complications in gynaecological oncology: prospective multicentre study |
Open access status: | An open access version is available from UCL Discovery |
DOI: | 10.1111/1471-0528.13994 |
Publisher version: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13994 |
Language: | English |
Additional information: | This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Burnell, M; Iyer, R; Gentry-Maharaj, A; Nordin, A; Liston, R; Manchanda, R; Das, N; (2016) Benchmarking of surgical complications in gynaecological oncology: prospective multicentre study, BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.13994. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving. |
Keywords: | UKGOSOC, Benchmarking, centres, comparison, complications, gynaecological oncology, risk adjustment, surgery |
UCL classification: | UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Inst of Clinical Trials and Methodology UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Inst of Clinical Trials and Methodology > MRC Clinical Trials Unit at UCL UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Institute of Epidemiology and Health UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Population Health Sciences > Institute of Epidemiology and Health > Epidemiology and Public Health |
URI: | https://discovery-pp.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1482145 |
Archive Staff Only
View Item |