Emergency General Surgery Outcomes Research Articles

Assessment of emergency general surgery care based on formally developed quality indicators

Emergency general surgery outcomes vary widely across the United States. The utilization of quality indicators can reduce variation and assist providers in administering care aligned with established recommendations. Previous quality indicators have not focused on emergency general surgery patients. We identified indicators of high-quality emergency general surgery care and assessed patient- and hospital-level compliance with these indicators. We utilized a modified Delphi technique (RAND Appropriateness Methodology) to develop quality indicators. Through 2 rankings, an expert panel ranked potential quality indicators for validity. We then examined historic compliance with select quality indicators after 4 nonelective procedures (cholecystectomy, appendectomy, colectomy, small bowel resection) at 4 academic centers. Of 25 indicators rated as valid, 13 addressed patient-level quality and 12 addressed hospital-level quality. Adherence with 18 indicators was assessed. Compliance with performing a cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis within 72hours of symptom onset ranged from 45% to 76%. Compliance with surgery start times within 3hours from the decision to operate for uncontained perforated viscus ranged from 20% to 100%. Compliance with exploration of patients with small bowel obstructions with ischemia/impending perforation within 3hours of the decision to operate was 0% to 88%. For 3 quality indicators (auditing 30-day unplanned readmissions/operations for patients previously managed nonoperatively, monitoring time to source control for intra-abdominal infections, and having protocols for bypass/transfer), none of the hospitals were compliant. Developing indicators for providers to assess their performance provides a foundation for specific initiatives. Adherence to quality indicators may improve the quality of emergency general surgery care provided for which current outcomes are potentially modifiable.

The 100 most cited manuscripts in emergency abdominal surgery: A bibliometric analysis

BackgroundThe number of citations a scientific article receives provides a good indication of its impact within any given field. This bibliometric analysis aimed to identify the 100 most cited articles in Emergency Abdominal Surgery (EAS), to highlight key areas of interest and identify those that have most significantly shaped contemporary clinical practice in this newly evolving surgical specialty. This is of increasing relevance as concerns grow regarding the variable and suboptimal outcomes in Emergency General Surgery. Materials and methodsThe Thomson Reuters Web of Science database was used to search using the terms [Emergency AND Abdom* AND Surg*] to identify all English language, full manuscripts. Results were ranked according to citation number. The top 100 articles were further analysed by subject, author, journal, year of publication, institution, and country of origin. ResultsThe median (range) citation number of the top 100 out of 7433 eligible papers was 131 (1569-97). The most cited paper (by Goldman et al., Massachusetts General Hospital, New England Journal of Medicine; 1569 citations) focused on cardiac risk stratification in non-cardiac surgery. The Journal of Trauma, Injury, Infection and Critical Care published the most papers and received most citations (n = 19; 2954 citations. The majority of papers were published by centres in the USA (n = 52; 9422 citations), followed by the UK (n = 13; 1816 citations). The most common topics of publication concerned abdominal aneurysm management (n = 26) and emergency gastrointestinal surgery (n = 26). ConclusionVascular surgery, risk assessment and gastrointestinal surgery were the areas of focus for 59% of the contemporary most cited emergency abdominal surgery manuscripts. By providing the most influential references this work serves as a guide to what makes a citable emergency surgery paper.

Acute care surgery and emergency general surgery: Addition by subtraction.

The formation of Acute Care Surgery services leads to decreased time to treatment and improved outcomes for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients. However, minimal work has focused on the ideal care delivery system and team structure. We hypothesize that the implementation of a dedicated EGS team (separate from trauma and surgical critical care), with EGS-specific protocols and dedicated operating room (OR) time, will increase productivity and improve mortality. This is a retrospective review of financial and EGS registry data from fiscal year (FY) 12 to FY15. Data are from an academic, university-based EGS team composed of two acute care surgery attending surgeons, advanced practitioners (APs), residents, and a fellow. In FY12, processes were implemented to standardize paging of consults, patient sign-out with attending surgeons' and APs' participation, clinical/billing protocols, OR availability, and quality improvement. Outcomes included relative value units (RVUs), surgical case volume, charges/payments, and number of patient encounters. The secondary outcome was mortality. The χ test was used to compare mortality, and p < 0.05 was considered significant. Total patient encounters increased from 6,723 in FY 12 to 9,238 in FY 15 (+37%). Relative value units increased from 18,422 in FY 12 to 25,314 in FY 15 (+37%). Charges increased by 76% and payments increased by 60% from FY 12 to FY 15. Charges per encounter increased from $461 in FY 12 to $591 in FY 15 (+28%) Additionally, both inpatient and surgical case loads increased. Mortality remained stable throughout the study period (FY 12, 4.5%; FY 13, 5.2%; FY 14, 5.3%; FY 15, 3.2%: p = 0.177). Implementation of dedicated OR time, defined EGS team structure, practice protocols, and active attending surgeons'/APs' participation was temporally related to increased case volume, patients seen, and revenue, while mortality remained unchanged. Further study is necessary to establish the translatability of these data to other systems. Economic/decision, level III.

Outcomes in emergency general surgery following the introduction of a consultant-led unit.

Patients presenting with emergency surgical conditions place significant demands on healthcare services globally. The need to improve emergency surgical care has led to establishment of consultant-led emergency surgery units. The aim of this study was to determine the effect of a changed model of service on outcomes. A retrospective observational study of all consecutive emergency general surgical admissions in 2009-2012 was performed. A 2-year time frame before and after the establishment of the emergency general surgery (EGS) service was used to determine the number of admissions and operations, emergency department and hospital length of stay, as well as complication rates. The study included 7233 acute admissions. The EGS service managed 4468 patients (61·6 per cent increase) and performed 1804 operations (41·0 per cent increase). The most common diagnoses during the EGS period included acute appendicitis (532, 11·9 per cent), biliary disease (361, 8·1 per cent) and abdominal pain (561, 12·6 per cent). Appendicectomy (536, 29·7 per cent), cholecystectomy (239, 13·2 per cent) and laparotomy (226, 12·5 per cent) were the most commonly performed procedures. In the EGS period, time in the emergency department was reduced (from 8·0 to 6·0 h; P < 0·001), as was length of hospital stay (from 3·0 to 2·0 days; P < 0·001). The number of complications was reduced by 46·8 per cent, from 172 (6·2 per cent) to 147 (3·3 per cent) (P < 0·001), with a 53 per cent reduction in the number of deaths in the EGS period, from 29 (16·9 per cent) to seven (8 per cent) (P = 0·039). The establishment of a consultant-led emergency surgical service has been associated with improved provision of care, resulting in timely management and improved clinical outcomes.

Innovation or rebranding, acute care surgery diffusion will continue

BackgroundPatterns of adoption of acute care surgery (ACS) as a strategy for emergency general surgery (EGS) care are unknown. MethodsWe conducted a qualitative study comprising face-to-face interviews with senior surgeons responsible for ACS at 18 teaching hospitals chosen to ensure diversity of opinions and practice environment (three practice types [community, public or charity, and university] in each of six geographic regions [Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, New England, Northeast, South, and West]). Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo (QSR International, Melbourne, Australia). We applied the methods of investigator triangulation using an inductive approach to develop a final taxonomy of codes organized by themes related to respondents' views on the future of ACS as a strategy for EGS. We applied our findings to a conceptual model on diffusion of innovation. ResultsWe found a paradox between ACS viewed as a health care delivery innovation versus a rebranding of comprehensive general surgery. Optimism for the future of ACS because of increased desirability for trauma and critical care careers as well as improved EGS outcomes was tempered by fear over lack of continuity, poor institutional resources, and uncertainty regarding financial viability. Our analysis suggests that the implementation of ACS, whether a true health care delivery innovation or an innovative rebranding, fits into the Rogers' diffusion of innovation theory. ConclusionsDespite concerns over resource allocation and the definition of the specialty, from the perspective of senior surgeons deeply entrenched in executing this care delivery model, ACS represents the new face of general surgery that will likely continue to diffuse from these early adopters.

National estimates of predictors of outcomes for emergency general surgery.

Identifying predictors of mortality and surgical complications has led to outcome improvements for a variety of surgical conditions. However, similar work has yet to be done for factors affecting outcomes of emergency general surgery (EGS). The objective of this study was to determine the predictors of in-hospital complications and mortality among EGS patients. The Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2003-2011) was queried for patients with conditions encompassing EGS as determined by the American Association for Surgery of Trauma, categorizing them into predefined EGS groups using DRG International Classification of Diseases-9th Rev.-Clinical Modification codes. Primary outcomes considered included incidence of a major complication (pneumonia, pulmonary emboli, urinary tract infections, myocardial infarctions, sepsis, or septic shock) and in-hospital mortality. Separate multivariate logistic regression analyses for complications and mortality were performed to identify risk factors of either outcome from the following domains: patient demographics (age, sex, insurance type, race, and income quartile), comorbidities, and hospital characteristics (location, teaching status, and bed size). This study included 6,712,151 discharge records, weighted to represent 32,910,446 visits for EGS conditions. Mean age was 58.50 (19.74) years; slightly more than half (54.66%) were female. Uninsured patients were more likely to die (odds ratio,1.25; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-1.30), whereas patients in the highest income quartile had the least likelihood of mortality (odds ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-0.87). Old age was an independent predictor of mortality for all EGS subdiagnoses. The overall mortality rate was 1.76%; the overall complication rate was 10.03%. Of the patients who died, 62% experienced at least one major complication. Patients requiring resuscitation had the highest likelihood of mortality followed by patients with vascular disease and hepatic disease. Death patterns of EGS patients were discerned using an administrative data set. Understanding patterns of mortality and complications derived from studies such as this could improve hospital benchmarking for EGS, akin to trauma surgery's previous success. Prognostic and epidemiologic study, level III.

Emergency general surgery outcomes at safety net hospitals

BackgroundThe United States hospital safety net is defined by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality as the top decile of hospitals, which see the greatest proportion of uninsured patients. These hospitals provide important access to health care for uninsured patients but are commonly believed to have worse outcomes. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of emergency general surgery procedures performed at safety net and nonsafety net hospitals. Material and methodsThe Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2008–2010 was used to create a cohort of inpatients who underwent emergency appendectomy, cholecystectomy, or herniorrhaphy. Outcomes measured included length of stay, charge, cost, death in hospital, complications, and failure to rescue (FTR). Univariate and logistic regression analysis was performed to associate variables with outcomes. ResultsA total of 187,913 emergency general surgery cases were identified, 11.5% of which were performed at safety net hospitals. The safety net cohort had increased length of stay but lower mean charge and cost. Age, comorbidity score, black race, male gender, and Medicaid and Medicare insurance were associated with mortality, complication, and FTR. Lower socioeconomic status was associated with mortality and complication. Safety net status was positively associated with complication but not mortality or FTR. ConclusionsSafety net hospitals had higher complication rates but no difference in FTR or mortality. This may mean that the hospitals are able to effectively recognize and treat patient complications and do so without increased cost.

Using the age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index to predict outcomes in emergency general surgery.

We evaluated the role of the Charlson age-comorbidity index (CACI), a weighted comorbidity index that reflects cumulative increased likelihood of 1-year mortality, in predicting perioperative outcomes in an emergency general surgery population at a large Canadian teaching hospital. A retrospective chart review of emergency general surgery admissions in 2010 was conducted. Patients who had surgery were identified. Mode of surgery and CACI were recorded, as well as measures of outcome, including 30-day mortality and intensive care unit (ICU) admission. A multivariate stepwise logistic regression model was created to assess the effect of age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index on postoperative outcomes while controlling for the effect of possible confounders. The prediction ability of CACI for mortality was assessed using receiver operating characteristic analyses considering the area under the curve and its 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Of the 529 admissions to general surgery from the emergency department, 257 patients underwent a surgical intervention. The CACI scores ranged from 0 to 16. We described a total of 11 deaths (4.3%) and 30 ICU admissions (11.7%). CACI was associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio,1.39; 95% CI, 1.11-1.73; p = 0.0034). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was consistent with high accuracy of CACI for mortality prediction alone, resulting in area under the curve or c statistic of 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84-0.95). CACI was similar in predicting mortality to a multivariate model. CACI was also found to be associated with ICU admission (adjusted odds ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.01-1.37; p < 0.0382). CACI is not as good a predictor for ICU admission when compared with the multivariate model. We have shown that the CACI is a valid tool for 30-day mortality prediction in the context of emergency general surgery. Prognostic study, level III.

Trainee participation is associated with adverse outcomes in emergency general surgery: an analysis of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database.

To identify whether resident involvement affects clinically relevant outcomes in emergency general surgery. Previous research has demonstrated a significant impact of trainee participation on outcomes in a broad surgical patient population. We identified 141,010 patients who underwent emergency general surgery procedures in the 2005-2010 Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Because of the nonrandom assignment of complex cases to resident participation, patients were matched (1:1) on known risk factors [age, sex, inpatient status, preexisting comorbidities (obesity, diabetes, smoking, alcohol, steroid use, coronary artery disease, chronic renal failure, pulmonary disease)] and preoperatively calculated probability for morbidity and mortality. Clinically relevant outcomes were compared with a t or χ test. The impact of resident participation on outcomes was assessed with multivariable regression modeling, adjusting for risk factors and operative time. The most common procedures in the matched cohort (n = 83,790) were appendectomy (39.9%), exploratory laparotomy (8.8%), and adhesiolysis (6.6%). Trainee participation is independently associated with intra- and postoperative events, wound, pulmonary, and venous thromboembolic complications, and urinary tract infections. Trainee participation is associated with adverse outcomes in emergency general surgery procedures.

Emergency General Surgery Outcomes at Safety Net Hospitals

Emergency General Surgery Outcomes at Safety Net Hospitals

A qualitative analysis of acute care surgery in the United States: It's more than just “a competent surgeon with a sharp knife and a willing attitude”

Since acute care surgery (ACS) was conceptualized a decade ago, the specialty has been adopted widely; however, little is known about the structure and function of ACS teams. We conducted 18 open-ended interviews with ACS leaders (representing geographic [New England, Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, South, West, Midwest] and practice [Public/Charity, Community, University] diversity). Two independent reviewers analyzed transcribed interviews using an inductive approach (NVivo qualitative analysis software). All respondents described ACS as a specialty treating "time-sensitive surgical disease" including trauma, emergency general surgery (EGS), and surgical critical care (SCC); 11 of 18 combined trauma and EGS into a single clinical team; 9 of 18 included elective general surgery. Emergency orthopedics, emergency neurosurgery, and surgical subspecialty triage were rare (1/18 each). Eight of 18 ACS teams had scheduled EGS operating room time. All had a core group of trauma and SCC surgeons; 13 of 18 shared EGS due to volume, human resources, or competition for revenue. Only 12 of 18 had formal signout rounds; only 2 of 18 had prospective EGS data registries. Streamlined access to EGS, evidence-based protocols, and improved education were considered strengths of ACS. ACS was described as the "last great surgical service" reinvigorated to provide "timely," cost-effective EGS by experts in "resuscitation and critical care" and to attract "young, talented, eager surgeons" to trauma/SCC; however, there was concern that ACS might become the "wastebasket for everything that happens at inconvenient times." Despite rapid adoption of ACS, its implementation varies widely. Standardization of scope of practice, continuity of care, and registry development may improve EGS outcomes and allow the specialty to thrive.

Effect Of Trauma Center Status on 30-Day Outcomes After Emergency General Surgery

Trauma surgeons increasingly care for emergency general surgery (EGS) patients. The extent to which trauma center (TC) performance improvement translates into improved quality for EGS is unknown. We hypothesized that EGS outcomes in TCs would be similar to outcomes in non-trauma centers (NTC); failure to support our hypothesis suggests that the effects of trauma performance improvement have extended beyond trauma patients. We retrospectively studied EGS procedures at TCs versus NTCs among American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program participants (2005-2008). Thirty-day outcomes were overall morbidity, serious morbidity, and mortality. TC versus NTC outcomes were compared using regression modeling, observed-to-expected (O/E) ratios (among hospitals submitting ≥20 EGS procedures), and outlier status (hospitals whose O/E confidence interval excludes 1.0). Of 68,003 patients at 222 hospitals, 42,264 (62.2%) were treated at 121 TCs; 25,739 (37.8%) were treated at 101 NTCs. TCs had significantly higher overall morbidity (21.4% versus 17.2%; p < 0.0001), serious morbidity (15.8% versus 12.3%; p < 0.0001), and mortality (6.4% versus 4.8%; p < 0.0001) than NTCs. On adjusted analyses, TC status was a significant predictor of overall morbidity (odds ratio = 1.11; 95% CI, 1.01-1.21), but not serious morbidity (odds ratio = 1.08; 95% CI, 0.98-1.19) or mortality (odds ratio = 0.92; 95% CI, 0.82-1.04). Among 211 hospitals assigned O/E ratios, TCs were more likely, although not significantly so, to be high outliers for overall morbidity (7.6% versus 4.3%; p = 0.017), serious morbidity (5.1% versus 4.3%; p = 0.034), and mortality (3.4% versus 2.2%; p > 0.099). Although overall morbidity tended to favor NTCs, mortality was no different. This suggests that the trauma performance improvement processes have not been applied to EGS patients, despite being cared for by similar providers. Despite having processes for trauma, there remains the opportunity for quality improvement for EGS care.