A longitudinal study examining the relationship between prioritization scores and changes in impact on life scores in elective surgery patients

Background Healthcare systems globally face the issue of resource constraints and need for prioritization of elective surgery. Inclusive, explicit prioritization tools are important in improving consistency and equity of access to surgery across health systems. The General Surgical Prioritization To...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:ANZ journal of surgery 2024-10, Vol.94 (10), p.1853-1859
Hauptverfasser: McCombie, Andrew, Bothara, Roshit, MacCormick, Andrew, Carne, Brennan, Hercus, Alastair, Eglinton, Tim
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background Healthcare systems globally face the issue of resource constraints and need for prioritization of elective surgery. Inclusive, explicit prioritization tools are important in improving consistency and equity of access to surgery across health systems. The General Surgical Prioritization Tool developed by New Zealand's Ministry of Health scores patients for elective non‐cancer surgery based on surgeon's clinical judgement and patient derived Impact on Life (IoL) scores. This study aims to measure the changes in patient derived IoL scores after common general surgical procedures to enable direct comparison and inform future prioritization. Method This longitudinal observational study enrolled 322 participants who had undergone elective general surgical procedures. Participants were contacted 3 to 9 months after their procedures and requested to complete the IoL questionnaire. The primary endpoint was the change in IoL scores after surgery among the different procedures. Results Overall, 229/304 (75%) participants responded to the questionnaire and there were no significant baseline differences between responders and non‐responders. Patients in the gallbladder treatment group had the greatest improvement in IoL scores. Patients across all ethnic groups had similar changes in IoL scores. Multivariate analysis showed that gallbladder surgery (relative to hernia surgery) and pre‐surgery IoL scores significantly predicted improvement. Conclusion The patient reported IoL score recorded at prioritization for surgery all reduced, albeit to varying amounts, after common general surgical procedures. This, combined with the fact that IoL scores predicted post‐operative improvement support their inclusion in prioritization tools in addition to surgeon derived components. There is a scarcity of elective surgery resources and so prioritization is required. This study demonstrates that the New Zealand General Surgery Prioritization Tool is associated with improvements in quality of life.
ISSN:1445-1433
1445-2197
1445-2197
DOI:10.1111/ans.19014