A Comparison of Common Plastic Surgery Operations Using the NSQIP and TOPS Databases.

UNLABELLED

Both the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and the American Society of Plastic Surgeons Tracking Operations and Outcomes for Plastic Surgeons (TOPS) databases track 30-day outcomes.

METHODS

Using the 2008-2016 TOPS and NSQIP databases, we compared patient characteristics and postoperative outcomes for 5 common plastic surgery procedures. A weighted TOPS population was used to mirror the NSQIP population in clinical and demographic characteristics to compare postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 154,181 cases. Compared with NSQIP patients, TOPS patients were more likely to be younger (47.9 versus 50.0 years), have American Society of Anesthesiologists class I-II (92.1% versus 74.6%), be outpatient (66.0% versus 49.3%), and be smokers (18.7% versus 11.7%). TOPS had extensive missing data: body mass index (40.6%), American Society of Anesthesiologists class (34.9%), diabetes (39.3%), and smoking status (37.2%). NSQIP was missing <1% of all shared categories except race (15.6%). The entire TOPS cohort versus only TOPS patients without missing data had higher rates of dehiscence (5.1% versus 3.5%) and infection (2.1% versus 1.7%). TOPS versus NSQIP patients had higher dehiscence rates (5.1% versus 1.0%) but lower rates of return to the operating room (3.1% versus 6.6%), infection (2.1% versus 3.0%), and medical complications (0.3% versus 2.2%). Nonweighted and weighted TOPS cohorts had similar 30-day outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

NSQIP and TOPS populations are different in characteristics and outcomes, likely due to differences in collection methodology and the types physicians using the databases. The strengths of each dataset can be used together for research and quality improvement.