Aller au contenu principal
2019 article

Comparison of administrative data and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data in a New South Wales Hospital

5Citations signalées — pas une note de qualité
5Institutions déclarées
1Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is widely used in North America for benchmarking. In 2015, NSQIP was introduced to four New South Wales public hospitals. The aim of this study is to investigate the agreement between NSQIP and administrative data in the Australian setting; to compare the performance of models derived from each data set to predict 30-day outcomes. METHODS: The NSQIP and administrative data variables were mapped to select variables available in both data sets where coding may be influenced by interpretation of the clinical information. These were compared for agreement. Logistic regression models were fitted to estimate the probability of adverse outcomes within 30 days. Models derived from NSQIP and administrative data were compared by receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. RESULTS: A total of 2240 procedures over 21 months had matching records. Functional status demonstrated poor agreement (kappa 0.02): administrative data recorded only one (1%) patient with partial- or total-dependence as recorded by NSQIP data. The American Society of Anesthesiologists class demonstrated excellent agreement (kappa 0.91). Other perioperative variables demonstrated poor to fair agreement (kappa 0.12-0.61). Predictive model based on NSQIP data was excellent at predicting mortality but was less accurate for complications and readmissions. The NSQIP model was better in predicting mortality and complications (receiver operating characteristic curve 0.93 versus 0.87; P = 0.029 and 0.71 versus 0.64; P = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: There is poor agreement between NSQIP data and administrative data. Predictive models associated with NSQIP data were more accurate at predicting surgical outcomes than those from administrative data. To drive quality improvement in surgery, high-quality clinical data are required and we believe that NSQIP fulfils this function.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Contrôle bibliographique ouvert

DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.

Titre Crossref
Comparison of administrative data and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data in a New South Wales Hospital
Date Crossref
15/12/2019
Éditeur
Wiley
Type
journal-article

Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude et ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.

Institutions déclarées

Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.

Sujets associés

Cardiac, Anesthesia and Surgical OutcomesPancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchPatient Safety and Medication Errors

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Recherche à la demande dans Crossref et Europe PMC, sans clé ; OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant requis, aucune réponse conservée. Sources et limites.