Healthcare Design Group, Department of Engineering, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
Division of Anaesthesia, University of Cambridge Department of Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
BMJ Open. 2022 Nov 11;12(11):e064105. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2022-064105.
To examine whether the use of process mapping and a multidisciplinary Delphi can identify potential contributors to perioperative risk. We hypothesised that this approach may identify factors not represented in common perioperative risk tools and give insights of use to future research in this area.
Multidisciplinary, modified Delphi study.
Two centres (one tertiary, one secondary) in the UK during 2020 amidst coronavirus pressures.
91 stakeholders from 23 professional groups involved in the perioperative care of older patients. Key stakeholder groups were identified via process mapping of local perioperative care pathways.
Response rate ranged from 51% in round 1 to 19% in round 3. After round 1, free text suggestions from the panel were combined with variables identified from perioperative risk scores. This yielded a total of 410 variables that were voted on in subsequent rounds. Including new suggestions from round two, 468/519 (90%) of the statements presented to the panel reached a consensus decision by the end of round 3. Identified risk factors included patient-level factors (such as ethnicity and socioeconomic status), and organisational or process factors related to the individual hospital (such as policies, staffing and organisational culture). 66/160 (41%) of the new suggestions did not feature in systematic reviews of perioperative risk scores or key process indicators. No factor categorised as 'organisational' is currently present in any perioperative risk score.
Through process mapping and a modified Delphi we gained insights into additional factors that may contribute to perioperative risk. Many were absent from currently used risk stratification scores. These results enable an appreciation of the contextual limitations of currently used risk tools and could support future research into the generation of more holistic data sets for the development of perioperative risk assessment tools.
探讨流程映射和多学科 Delphi 法是否可用于确定围术期风险的潜在影响因素。我们假设该方法可能会识别出常见围术期风险工具中未体现的因素,并为该领域的未来研究提供有价值的见解。
多学科改良 Delphi 研究。
2020 年在英国的两个中心(一个为三级医院,一个为二级医院),研究期间恰逢新冠疫情。
91 名来自 23 个专业组的利益相关者,涉及老年患者的围术期护理。关键利益相关者组通过对当地围术期护理路径的流程映射进行识别。
首轮的回复率为 51%,而在第 3 轮则为 19%。首轮过后,将小组的自由文本建议与围术期风险评分中确定的变量进行了组合。这总共产生了 410 个变量,在随后的几轮中进行了投票。第 2 轮提出的新建议纳入在内,到第 3 轮结束时,小组共就 468/519(90%)个提交的陈述达成了共识。确定的风险因素包括患者层面的因素(如种族和社会经济地位),以及与医院相关的组织或流程因素(如政策、人员配备和组织文化)。在系统回顾围术期风险评分或关键流程指标时,有 66/160(41%)个新建议未涉及。目前,任何围术期风险评分中都没有归类为“组织”的因素。
通过流程映射和改良 Delphi 法,我们深入了解了可能导致围术期风险的其他因素。其中许多因素目前都未包含在常用的风险分层评分中。这些结果使人们能够认识到当前使用的风险工具的背景局限性,并为未来研究开发更全面的数据集以用于围术期风险评估工具提供支持。