Readmissions after general surgery: a prospective multicenter audit

Readmission rates after surgical procedures are viewed as a marker of quality of care and as a driver to improve outcomes in the United Kingdom, they are not remunerated. However, readmissions are not wholly avoidable. The aim of this study was to develop a regional overview of readmissions to deter...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of surgical research 2017-03, Vol.209, p.53-59
Hauptverfasser: Lee, Matthew J., Daniels, Sarah L., Wild, Jonathan R.L., Wilson, Timothy R., Jackson, Andrew, Shun, Claire Kok, Wheeler, Alexandre, West, Rebecca, Nofal, Emma Mary, Proctor, Victoria Kate, Rigby, Matthew, Burnett, Heather, Gaikwad, Raj, Madhbak, Khalil, Flatt, Eli, Akram, Farah
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 59
container_issue
container_start_page 53
container_title The Journal of surgical research
container_volume 209
creator Lee, Matthew J.
Daniels, Sarah L.
Wild, Jonathan R.L.
Wilson, Timothy R.
Jackson, Andrew
Shun, Claire Kok
Wheeler, Alexandre
West, Rebecca
Nofal, Emma Mary
Proctor, Victoria Kate
Rigby, Matthew
Burnett, Heather
Gaikwad, Raj
Madhbak, Khalil
Flatt, Eli
Akram, Farah
description Readmission rates after surgical procedures are viewed as a marker of quality of care and as a driver to improve outcomes in the United Kingdom, they are not remunerated. However, readmissions are not wholly avoidable. The aim of this study was to develop a regional overview of readmissions to determine the proportion that might be avoidable and to examine predictors of readmissions at a unit level. We undertook a prospective multicenter audit of readmissions following National Health Service funded general surgical procedures in five National Health Service hospitals and three independent sector providers over a 2-wk period. Basic demographic and procedure data were captured. Readmissions to hospitals were identified through acute admissions lists. Reason for readmission was identified, and the readmission data assessed by a senior surgical doctor as to whether it was avoidable. We identified 752 operations in the study period with all followed up to 30 d. The overall rate of readmissions was 4.7%, with 40% of these judged as being potentially avoidable. Pain and wound problems accounted for the vast majority of avoidable readmissions. The number of unavoidable readmissions was correlated with the workload of each center (r = 0.63, P = 0.06) and as with the higher (British United Provident Association) complexity of surgery (r = 0.90, P = 0.01). Patient and demographic factors were not associated with readmissions. This prospective audit describes readmission rates after general surgery. Volume and complexity of work are associated with readmission rates. A large proportion of readmissions could be reduced by attention to analgesia and outpatient arrangements for wound management.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jss.2016.09.020
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1854107465</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022480416303882</els_id><sourcerecordid>1854107465</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-63c1408356d013b0e0ed77e566ced25326b21d3ba9ce4331bd963b3cf31e9e693</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6A7xIj15aJ0mbtnqSxS9YEETPIU2mS0o_1qRd2H9vll09epoMPPPy5iHkmkJCgYq7Jmm8T1h4JlAmwOCEzCmUWVyInJ-SOQBjcVpAOiMX3jcQ9jLn52TGCuAsy-mcLD9Qmc56b4feR6oe0UVr7NGpNvKTW6Pb3Ucq2rjBb1CPdotRN7Wj1djvUTUZO16Ss1q1Hq-Oc0G-np8-l6_x6v3lbfm4inUqxBgLrmkKBc-EAcorQECT55gJodGwjDNRMWp4pUqNKee0MqXgFdc1p1iiKPmC3B5yQ5vvCf0oQ3GNbat6HCYvaZGlFPJUZAGlB1SH4t5hLTfOdsrtJAW5dycbGdzJvTsJpQzuws3NMX6qOjR_F7-yAvBwADB8cmvRSa8t9qG9dcGNNIP9J_4Hu0p_Mw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1854107465</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Readmissions after general surgery: a prospective multicenter audit</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete</source><creator>Lee, Matthew J. ; Daniels, Sarah L. ; Wild, Jonathan R.L. ; Wilson, Timothy R. ; Jackson, Andrew ; Shun, Claire Kok ; Wheeler, Alexandre ; West, Rebecca ; Nofal, Emma Mary ; Proctor, Victoria Kate ; Rigby, Matthew ; Burnett, Heather ; Gaikwad, Raj ; Madhbak, Khalil ; Flatt, Eli ; Akram, Farah</creator><creatorcontrib>Lee, Matthew J. ; Daniels, Sarah L. ; Wild, Jonathan R.L. ; Wilson, Timothy R. ; Jackson, Andrew ; Shun, Claire Kok ; Wheeler, Alexandre ; West, Rebecca ; Nofal, Emma Mary ; Proctor, Victoria Kate ; Rigby, Matthew ; Burnett, Heather ; Gaikwad, Raj ; Madhbak, Khalil ; Flatt, Eli ; Akram, Farah ; SYSuRG RAGeS Group</creatorcontrib><description>Readmission rates after surgical procedures are viewed as a marker of quality of care and as a driver to improve outcomes in the United Kingdom, they are not remunerated. However, readmissions are not wholly avoidable. The aim of this study was to develop a regional overview of readmissions to determine the proportion that might be avoidable and to examine predictors of readmissions at a unit level. We undertook a prospective multicenter audit of readmissions following National Health Service funded general surgical procedures in five National Health Service hospitals and three independent sector providers over a 2-wk period. Basic demographic and procedure data were captured. Readmissions to hospitals were identified through acute admissions lists. Reason for readmission was identified, and the readmission data assessed by a senior surgical doctor as to whether it was avoidable. We identified 752 operations in the study period with all followed up to 30 d. The overall rate of readmissions was 4.7%, with 40% of these judged as being potentially avoidable. Pain and wound problems accounted for the vast majority of avoidable readmissions. The number of unavoidable readmissions was correlated with the workload of each center (r = 0.63, P = 0.06) and as with the higher (British United Provident Association) complexity of surgery (r = 0.90, P = 0.01). Patient and demographic factors were not associated with readmissions. This prospective audit describes readmission rates after general surgery. Volume and complexity of work are associated with readmission rates. A large proportion of readmissions could be reduced by attention to analgesia and outpatient arrangements for wound management.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-4804</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8673</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2016.09.020</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28032571</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Collaborative ; Female ; General surgery ; General Surgery - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Humans ; Male ; Medical Audit ; Middle Aged ; Patient Readmission - statistics &amp; numerical data ; Prospective Studies ; Quality ; Readmissions ; Workload ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>The Journal of surgical research, 2017-03, Vol.209, p.53-59</ispartof><rights>2016 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-63c1408356d013b0e0ed77e566ced25326b21d3ba9ce4331bd963b3cf31e9e693</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-63c1408356d013b0e0ed77e566ced25326b21d3ba9ce4331bd963b3cf31e9e693</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-9452-3344 ; 0000-0001-9971-1635</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2016.09.020$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27929,27930,46000</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28032571$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lee, Matthew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daniels, Sarah L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wild, Jonathan R.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Timothy R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jackson, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shun, Claire Kok</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Alexandre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>West, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nofal, Emma Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Proctor, Victoria Kate</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rigby, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burnett, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaikwad, Raj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Madhbak, Khalil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flatt, Eli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akram, Farah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SYSuRG RAGeS Group</creatorcontrib><title>Readmissions after general surgery: a prospective multicenter audit</title><title>The Journal of surgical research</title><addtitle>J Surg Res</addtitle><description>Readmission rates after surgical procedures are viewed as a marker of quality of care and as a driver to improve outcomes in the United Kingdom, they are not remunerated. However, readmissions are not wholly avoidable. The aim of this study was to develop a regional overview of readmissions to determine the proportion that might be avoidable and to examine predictors of readmissions at a unit level. We undertook a prospective multicenter audit of readmissions following National Health Service funded general surgical procedures in five National Health Service hospitals and three independent sector providers over a 2-wk period. Basic demographic and procedure data were captured. Readmissions to hospitals were identified through acute admissions lists. Reason for readmission was identified, and the readmission data assessed by a senior surgical doctor as to whether it was avoidable. We identified 752 operations in the study period with all followed up to 30 d. The overall rate of readmissions was 4.7%, with 40% of these judged as being potentially avoidable. Pain and wound problems accounted for the vast majority of avoidable readmissions. The number of unavoidable readmissions was correlated with the workload of each center (r = 0.63, P = 0.06) and as with the higher (British United Provident Association) complexity of surgery (r = 0.90, P = 0.01). Patient and demographic factors were not associated with readmissions. This prospective audit describes readmission rates after general surgery. Volume and complexity of work are associated with readmission rates. A large proportion of readmissions could be reduced by attention to analgesia and outpatient arrangements for wound management.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Collaborative</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>General surgery</subject><subject>General Surgery - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical Audit</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Patient Readmission - statistics &amp; numerical data</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Quality</subject><subject>Readmissions</subject><subject>Workload</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0022-4804</issn><issn>1095-8673</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6A7xIj15aJ0mbtnqSxS9YEETPIU2mS0o_1qRd2H9vll09epoMPPPy5iHkmkJCgYq7Jmm8T1h4JlAmwOCEzCmUWVyInJ-SOQBjcVpAOiMX3jcQ9jLn52TGCuAsy-mcLD9Qmc56b4feR6oe0UVr7NGpNvKTW6Pb3Ucq2rjBb1CPdotRN7Wj1djvUTUZO16Ss1q1Hq-Oc0G-np8-l6_x6v3lbfm4inUqxBgLrmkKBc-EAcorQECT55gJodGwjDNRMWp4pUqNKee0MqXgFdc1p1iiKPmC3B5yQ5vvCf0oQ3GNbat6HCYvaZGlFPJUZAGlB1SH4t5hLTfOdsrtJAW5dycbGdzJvTsJpQzuws3NMX6qOjR_F7-yAvBwADB8cmvRSa8t9qG9dcGNNIP9J_4Hu0p_Mw</recordid><startdate>201703</startdate><enddate>201703</enddate><creator>Lee, Matthew J.</creator><creator>Daniels, Sarah L.</creator><creator>Wild, Jonathan R.L.</creator><creator>Wilson, Timothy R.</creator><creator>Jackson, Andrew</creator><creator>Shun, Claire Kok</creator><creator>Wheeler, Alexandre</creator><creator>West, Rebecca</creator><creator>Nofal, Emma Mary</creator><creator>Proctor, Victoria Kate</creator><creator>Rigby, Matthew</creator><creator>Burnett, Heather</creator><creator>Gaikwad, Raj</creator><creator>Madhbak, Khalil</creator><creator>Flatt, Eli</creator><creator>Akram, Farah</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9452-3344</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9971-1635</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201703</creationdate><title>Readmissions after general surgery: a prospective multicenter audit</title><author>Lee, Matthew J. ; Daniels, Sarah L. ; Wild, Jonathan R.L. ; Wilson, Timothy R. ; Jackson, Andrew ; Shun, Claire Kok ; Wheeler, Alexandre ; West, Rebecca ; Nofal, Emma Mary ; Proctor, Victoria Kate ; Rigby, Matthew ; Burnett, Heather ; Gaikwad, Raj ; Madhbak, Khalil ; Flatt, Eli ; Akram, Farah</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-63c1408356d013b0e0ed77e566ced25326b21d3ba9ce4331bd963b3cf31e9e693</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Collaborative</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>General surgery</topic><topic>General Surgery - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical Audit</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Patient Readmission - statistics &amp; numerical data</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Quality</topic><topic>Readmissions</topic><topic>Workload</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lee, Matthew J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Daniels, Sarah L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wild, Jonathan R.L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wilson, Timothy R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jackson, Andrew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shun, Claire Kok</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wheeler, Alexandre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>West, Rebecca</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Nofal, Emma Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Proctor, Victoria Kate</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rigby, Matthew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burnett, Heather</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gaikwad, Raj</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Madhbak, Khalil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Flatt, Eli</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Akram, Farah</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SYSuRG RAGeS Group</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of surgical research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lee, Matthew J.</au><au>Daniels, Sarah L.</au><au>Wild, Jonathan R.L.</au><au>Wilson, Timothy R.</au><au>Jackson, Andrew</au><au>Shun, Claire Kok</au><au>Wheeler, Alexandre</au><au>West, Rebecca</au><au>Nofal, Emma Mary</au><au>Proctor, Victoria Kate</au><au>Rigby, Matthew</au><au>Burnett, Heather</au><au>Gaikwad, Raj</au><au>Madhbak, Khalil</au><au>Flatt, Eli</au><au>Akram, Farah</au><aucorp>SYSuRG RAGeS Group</aucorp><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Readmissions after general surgery: a prospective multicenter audit</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of surgical research</jtitle><addtitle>J Surg Res</addtitle><date>2017-03</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>209</volume><spage>53</spage><epage>59</epage><pages>53-59</pages><issn>0022-4804</issn><eissn>1095-8673</eissn><abstract>Readmission rates after surgical procedures are viewed as a marker of quality of care and as a driver to improve outcomes in the United Kingdom, they are not remunerated. However, readmissions are not wholly avoidable. The aim of this study was to develop a regional overview of readmissions to determine the proportion that might be avoidable and to examine predictors of readmissions at a unit level. We undertook a prospective multicenter audit of readmissions following National Health Service funded general surgical procedures in five National Health Service hospitals and three independent sector providers over a 2-wk period. Basic demographic and procedure data were captured. Readmissions to hospitals were identified through acute admissions lists. Reason for readmission was identified, and the readmission data assessed by a senior surgical doctor as to whether it was avoidable. We identified 752 operations in the study period with all followed up to 30 d. The overall rate of readmissions was 4.7%, with 40% of these judged as being potentially avoidable. Pain and wound problems accounted for the vast majority of avoidable readmissions. The number of unavoidable readmissions was correlated with the workload of each center (r = 0.63, P = 0.06) and as with the higher (British United Provident Association) complexity of surgery (r = 0.90, P = 0.01). Patient and demographic factors were not associated with readmissions. This prospective audit describes readmission rates after general surgery. Volume and complexity of work are associated with readmission rates. A large proportion of readmissions could be reduced by attention to analgesia and outpatient arrangements for wound management.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>28032571</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jss.2016.09.020</doi><tpages>7</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9452-3344</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9971-1635</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-4804
ispartof The Journal of surgical research, 2017-03, Vol.209, p.53-59
issn 0022-4804
1095-8673
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1854107465
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals Complete
subjects Adolescent
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Collaborative
Female
General surgery
General Surgery - statistics & numerical data
Humans
Male
Medical Audit
Middle Aged
Patient Readmission - statistics & numerical data
Prospective Studies
Quality
Readmissions
Workload
Young Adult
title Readmissions after general surgery: a prospective multicenter audit
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T09%3A37%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Readmissions%20after%20general%20surgery:%20a%20prospective%20multicenter%20audit&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20surgical%20research&rft.au=Lee,%20Matthew%20J.&rft.aucorp=SYSuRG%20RAGeS%20Group&rft.date=2017-03&rft.volume=209&rft.spage=53&rft.epage=59&rft.pages=53-59&rft.issn=0022-4804&rft.eissn=1095-8673&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jss.2016.09.020&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1854107465%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1854107465&rft_id=info:pmid/28032571&rft_els_id=S0022480416303882&rfr_iscdi=true