Harris, A O

Abstract: Direct data abstraction from a patient’s chart by experienced medical professional data abstractors has been the historical gold standard for quality and accuracy in clinical medical research. The limiting challenge to population-wide studies for quality and public health purposes is the high personnel costs associated with very large-scale efforts of this type. Two historically related programs that are at least partially able to successfully circumvent this problem and provide high-quality data relating to surgical procedures and the early postoperative period are reviewed in this article. Both utilize similar data abstraction efforts by specially trained and qualified medical abstractors of a sample subset of the total procedures performed at participating hospitals. The Veterans Affairs Surgical Quality Improvement Program (VASQIP), detailed by Nicholas J. Giori, MD, PhD, in the first section of this article, makes use of trained abstractors and has undergone recent additions and updates, including the development of an associated total hip registry for the VA system. The data elements and data integrity provided by both of these programs establish important benchmarks for other “big data” efforts, which often attempt to use alternative less-expensive methods of data collection in order to achieve more widespread or even nationwide data collection. In the second section, Elizabeth B. Habermann, PhD, MPH, provides a detailed review of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP), the data elements collected, and examples of the range of quality improvement and outcomes studies in orthopaedic surgery that it has made possible, along with information on data that have not been collected and the resulting limitations. The ACS NSQIP was actually modeled after the very similar earlier effort started by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

Objective: To describe the incidence and risk factors for mortality and morbidity in patients with cirrhosis undergoing elective or emergent abdominal surgeries. Background: Postoperative morbidity and mortality are higher in patients with cirrhosis; variation by surgical procedure type and cirrhosis severity remain unclear. Methods: We analyzed prospectively-collected data from the Veterans Affairs (VA) Surgical Quality Improvement Program for 8193 patients with cirrhosis, 864 noncirrhotic controls with chronic hepatitis B infection, and 5468 noncirrhotic controls without chronic liver disease, who underwent abdominal surgery from 2001 to 2017. Data were analyzed using random-effects models controlling for potential confounders. Results: Patients with cirrhosis had significantly higher 30-day mortality than noncirrhotic patients with chronic hepatitis B [4.4% vs 1.3%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 2.80, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.57–4.98] or with no chronic liver disease (0.8%, aOR 4.68, 95% CI 3.27–6.69); mortality difference was highest in patients with Model for End-stage Liver Disease (MELD) score ≥10. Among patients with cirrhosis, postoperative mortality was almost 6 times higher after emergent rather than elective surgery (17.2% vs. 2.1%, aOR 5.82, 95% CI 4.66–7.27). For elective surgeries, 30-day mortality was highest after colorectal resection (7.0%) and lowest after inguinal hernia repair (0.6%). Predictors of postoperative mortality included cirrhosis-related characteristics (high MELD score, low serum albumin, ascites, encephalopathy), surgery-related characteristics (emergent vs elective, type of surgery, intraoperative blood transfusion), comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, cancer, sepsis, ventilator dependence, functional status), and age. Conclusions: Accurate preoperative risk assessments in patients with cirrhosis should account for cirrhosis severity, comorbidities, type of procedure, and whether the procedure is emergent versus elective.