Quality and Patient Safety Indicators in Trauma and Emergency Surgery: National and Global Considerations
Purpose of Review
This review focuses on quality and patient safety indicators in trauma and emergency surgery in the developed and developing world.
Quality and patient safety indicators have proliferated in recent years. There is significant variability in the strength of evidence behind existing measures, as well as variability in their acceptance and utilization.
This review article highlights the evolution quality and patient safety indicators using examples from both the developed and the developing world. The authors include recommendations for future efforts to utilize and implement such indicators in trauma and emergency surgery. One key remaining challenge remains the development of meaningful, streamlined, and consensus-based performance metrics that simultaneously assess variations in quality and safety while also being easily measurable so as not to overly burden the people and systems tasked with collecting this important information.
KeywordsQuality indicators Patient safety Trauma systems Emergency surgery Global surgery Low- and middle-income countries (LMIC)
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.
Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent
This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.
Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance
- 2.• Shafi S, Aboutanos MB, Agarwal S Jr, Brown CV, Crandall M, Feliciano DV, et al. AAST Committee on Severity Assessment and Patient Outcomes. Emergency general surgery: definition and estimated burden of disease. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2013;74(4):1092–7. This article describes the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma’s (AAST) comprehensive effort to produce a consensus-based definition of Emergency General Surgery (EGS). A complete list of ICD-9 codes that comprise the scope of primary EGS diagnoses is provided. This publication can be used as the basis for further efforts aimed at creating and studying quality indicators in EGS. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 4.• Sangji NF, Bohnen JD, Ramly EP, Yeh DD, King DR, deMoya M, et al. Derivation and validation of a novel Emergency Surgery Acuity Score (ESAS). J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016;81(2):213–20. The Emergency Surgery Score is a recently described and validated scoring system for predicting perioperative morbidity and mortality for emergency general surgery patients. The Emergency Surgery Score holds promise as a tool to facilitate quality benchmarking in EGS. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 5.Bohnen JD, Ramly EP, Sangji NF, de Moya M, Yeh DD, Lee J, et al. Perioperative risk factors impact outcomes in emergency versus non-emergency surgery differently: time to separate our national risk-adjustment models? J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2016;81(1):122–30. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000001015.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Codman EA. A study in hospital efficiency: as demonstrated by the case report of the first five years of a private hospital. Boston: Th. Todd co.; 1918.Google Scholar
- 12.Davies SM, Geppert J, McClellan M, McDonald KM, Romano PS, Shojania KG. Refinement of the HCUP quality indicators, technical reviews, No. 4. UCSF-Stanford Evidence-based Practice Center. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2001.Google Scholar
- 13.Institute of Medicine. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, DC: National Academy; 2000.Google Scholar
- 14.Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm. Washington, DC: National Academy; 2001.Google Scholar
- 18.Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, Hur K, Demakis J, Aust JB, et al. The Department of Veterans Affairs NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program Ann Surg. 1998;228(4):491–507.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.Hall BL, Hamilton BH, Richards K, Bilimoria KY, Cohen ME, Ko CY. Does surgical quality improve in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: an evaluation of all participating hospitals. Ann Surg. 2009;250(3):363–76. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b4148f.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.ACS NSQIP: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip/program-specifics/participant-use, accessed October 8, 2017.
- 23.National Quality Forum. Measure evaluation criteria. http://www.qualityforum.org/docs/measure_evaluation_criterias.aspx, accessed 9/24/17.
- 25.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Prevention quality indicators: https://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/Modules/pqi_resources.aspx, accessed October 9, 2017.
- 26.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Inpatient quality indicators: https://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/Modules/iqi_resources.aspx, accessed October 9, 2017.
- 27.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Patient safety indicators: https://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/Modules/psi_resources.aspx, accessed October 9, 2017.
- 28.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Pediatric quality indicators: https://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/Modules/pdi_resources.aspx, accessed October 9, 2017.
- 29.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, National Quality forum endorsed individual and composite measures: http://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/Modules/list_ahrq_qi.aspx, accessed October 11, 2017.
- 30.Rosen AK, Loveland S, Shin M, Shwartz M, Hanchate A, Chen Q, et al. Examining the impact of the AHRQ patient safety indicators (PSIs) on the veterans health administration: the case of readmissions. Med Care. 2013;51(1):37–44. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e318270c0f7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 32.Rosen AK, Itani KM, Cevasco M, Kaafarani HM, Hanchate A, Shin M, et al. Validating the patient safety indicators in the Veterans Health Administration: do they accurately identify true safety events? Med Care. 2012;50(1):74–85. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182293edf.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 36.Romano PS, Mull HJ, Rivard PE, Zhao S, Henderson WG, Loveland S, etal. Validity of selected AHRQ patient safety indicators based on VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data. Health Serv Res 2009;44(1):182–204, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00905.x.
- 37.Kaafarani HM, Rosen AK Using administrative data to identify surgical adverse events: an introduction to the patient safety indicators. Am J Surg 2009;198(5 Suppl):S63–S68, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.08.008.
- 43.Morris BJ, Richards JE, Archer KR, Lasater M, Rabalais D, Sethi MK, et al. Improving patient satisfaction in the orthopaedic trauma population. J Orthop Trauma. 2014;28(4):e80–4. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.bot.0000435604.75873.ba.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 44.Committees on Trauma, Blue Book: a guide to organization objectives activities, American College of Surgeons, 2007.Google Scholar
- 47.Hospital resources for optimal care of the injured patient. Prepared by a task force of the committee on trauma of the American College of Surgeons. Bull Am Coll Surg. 1979;64(8):43–8.Google Scholar
- 50.Nayduch D, Moylan J, Snyder BL, Andrews L, Rutledge R, Cunningham P. American College of Surgeons trauma quality indicators: an analysis of outcome in a statewide trauma registry. J Trauma. 1994;37(4):565–73; discussion 573-5. https://doi.org/10.1097/00005373-199410000-00008.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 52.• Stelfox HT, Bobranska-Artiuch B, Nathens A, Straus SE. Quality indicators for evaluating trauma care: a scoping review. Arch Surg. 2010;145(3):286–95. This comprehensive review article summarizes available literature on quality indicators in trauma care through 2010. The authors identify 1572 trauma-related quality indicators across 192 articles and classify them along several different domains. Strengths and weaknesses of existing QIs are highlighted, along with recommendations for improvement of trauma care and research related to fQIs. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 56.Moore L, Lauzier F, Stelfox HT, Kortbeek J, Simons R, Bourgeois G, et al. Validation of complications selected by consensus to evaluate the acute phase of adult trauma care: a multicenter cohort study. Ann Surg 2015;262(6):1123–1129, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000963.
- 61.American College of Surgeons National Trauma Data Standard: https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/trauma/ntdb/ntds, accessed October 12, 2017.
- 65.Ingraham A, Nathens A, Peitzman A, Bode A, Dorlac G, Dorlac W, et al. American Association for the Surgery of Trauma emergency general surgery quality indicator development expert panel. Assessment of emergency general surgery care based on formally developed quality indicators. Surgery. 2017;162(2):397–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2017.03.025.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 67.Nandan AR, Bohnen JD, Sangji NF, Peponis T, Han K, Yeh DD, et al. The emergency surgery score (ESS) accurately predicts the occurrence of postoperative complications in emergency surgery patients. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2017;83(1):84–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/TA.0000000000001500.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 70.• Meara JG, Leather AJ, Hagander L, Alkire BC, Alonso N, Ameh EA, et al. Global Surgery 2030: evidence and solutions for achieving health, welfare, and economic development. Lancet. 2015;386(9993):569–624. In 2013, The Lancet called for the establishment of a Commission on the neglected topic of Global Surgery. Over the next 2 years, leaders from around the world met to define the state of surgery around the world and define plans for the improvement of the delivery of surgical care, especially in the poorest areas of this world. This publication represents the summary of years of effort by hundreds of clinicians, researchers, ministers of health, policy workers and thought leaders. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 71.Haider A, Scott JW, Gause CD, Mehes M, Hsiung G, Prelvukaj A, et al. Development of a unifying target and consensus indicators for global surgical systems strengthening: proposed by the global alliance for surgery, obstetric, trauma, and Anaesthesia care (the G4 alliance). World J Surg 2017.Google Scholar
- 74.Spence RT, Chang DC, Kaafarani HMA, Panieri E, Anderson GA, Hutter MM. Derivation, validation and application of a pragmatic risk prediction index for benchmarking of surgical outcomes. World J Surg. 2017;Google Scholar
- 82.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Patient Safety Indicators Appendices, Appendix G, Trauma Diagnosis Codes: https://www.qualityindicators.ahrq.gov/Downloads/Modules/PSI/V70/TechSpecs/PSI_Appendix_G.pdf, accessed October 10, 2017.