Allen Mark S, Blackmon Shanda, Nichols Francis C, Cassivi Stephen D, Shen K Robert, Wigle Dennis A
Division of General Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Division of General Thoracic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2015 Oct;100(4):1155-61; discussion 1161-2. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.05.031. Epub 2015 Aug 25.
Improving the quality of surgical care through accurate measurement of outcomes is an important endeavor. The purpose of this study was to compare data from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) and The Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) general thoracic surgery database to determine if a sampling technique (ACS NSQIP) is as effective and accurate as the comprehensive technique (STS database).
A common data abstractor collected and recorded data for the ACS NSQIP and STS database from our institution for the year 2012. The data was completely deidentified and analyzed for demographics, preoperative risk factors, mortality, and morbidity.
The STS database recorded 1,595 (100%) operations for the year 2012, whereas the ACS NSQIP by design collects a limited sample and recorded 308 (19.3%) operations. Postoperative events were recorded in 17.2% of ACS NSQIP operations and in 30.1% of operations reported in the STS database. As more specific operations are examined, errors in the NSQIP data increase significantly. For example, the ACS NSQIP underestimated the pneumonia rate for lobectomy (5.9% versus 10.9%) and overestimated the pneumonia rate for an Ivor Lewis esophagogastrectomy (23.8% vs 18.8%). When the ACS NSQIP was used to compare our institution to the ACS NSQIP national norms, our institution was ranked in the lowest eighth decile for 30-day operative mortality; however, we were better than average when using STS database data (1.2% [2 of 162 procedures] vs 1.4% [538 of 37,324 procedures]) for pulmonary resections and 3.0% (3 of 100 procedures) vs 3.6% [138 of 3,865 procedures] for esophagectomy).
Databases built on partial sampling that do not capture all patients, such as the ACS NSQIP, may be useful for global analyses, but fall short of providing a foundation for meaningful quality improvement initiatives when analyzing data for specific thoracic surgical operations. These results highlight the utility and importance of complete databases such as the STSDB. National comparisons of clinical outcomes for thoracic surgical procedures should be interpreted with caution when using partial databases.
通过准确测量手术结果来提高手术护理质量是一项重要工作。本研究的目的是比较美国外科医师学会国家外科质量改进计划(ACS NSQIP)和胸外科医师协会(STS)普通胸外科数据库的数据,以确定抽样技术(ACS NSQIP)是否与全面技术(STS数据库)一样有效和准确。
一名普通数据提取员收集并记录了我们机构2012年ACS NSQIP和STS数据库的数据。数据完全匿名化,并对人口统计学、术前风险因素、死亡率和发病率进行了分析。
STS数据库记录了2012年的1595例(100%)手术,而ACS NSQIP按设计收集有限样本,记录了308例(19.3%)手术。ACS NSQIP手术中有17.2%记录了术后事件,STS数据库报告的手术中有30.1%记录了术后事件。随着对更具体手术的检查,NSQIP数据中的错误显著增加。例如,ACS NSQIP低估了肺叶切除术的肺炎发生率(5.9%对10.9%),高估了艾弗·刘易斯食管胃切除术的肺炎发生率(23.8%对18.8%)。当使用ACS NSQIP将我们机构与ACS NSQIP全国标准进行比较时,我们机构在30天手术死亡率方面排名处于最低的十分位;然而,在使用STS数据库数据进行肺切除时,我们机构优于平均水平(1.2%[162例手术中的2例]对1.4%[37324例手术中的538例]),食管切除术方面为3.0%(100例手术中的3例)对3.6%[3865例手术中的138例])。
基于不涵盖所有患者的部分抽样建立的数据库,如ACS NSQIP,可能对整体分析有用,但在分析特定胸外科手术数据时,不足以提供有意义的质量改进举措的基础。这些结果凸显了完整数据库如STSDB的实用性和重要性。在使用部分数据库时,应谨慎解释胸外科手术临床结果的全国性比较。