Complexity- and risk-adjusted model for measuring surgical outcome
- 1 December 1999
- journal article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in British Journal of Surgery
- Vol. 86 (12), 1567-1572
- https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2168.1999.01286.x
Abstract
Background: Although currently available surgical scoring systems have good outcome predictive power, their use is often limited by complexity and their non-dynamic nature. The aim of this study was to develop and test a risk adjustment for general surgical audit which is both simple and dynamic, while preserving a high predictive power for surgical morbidity. Methods: Twelve easily measured, well defined prognostic variables for morbidity were identified from the Otago Surgical Audit data collection form and stratified into suitable categories. Logistic regression was used to adjust for confounding between factors, identifying risk factors with the strongest prognostic value for the outcome of severe and intermediate complications. The resulting model was tested by back-validation and validation. Results: The derived risk adjustment included all 12 variables. Adjusted odds ratios for all variables were markedly lower than unadjusted values. After logistic regression, the strongest predictors of postoperative morbidity were duration of operation, operation category, inpatient status and organ system in which the procedure was carried out. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0·86. Conclusion: A simple dynamic model for surgical morbidity has been developed which is comparable to previously published surgical scoring systems in terms of predictive power. This risk adjustment tool can be incorporated into the existing audit system, enabling comparison of surgical unit performance.Keywords
This publication has 15 references indexed in Scilit:
- Presentation of comparative audit dataBritish Journal of Surgery, 1995
- The veterans affairs continuous improvement in cardiac surgery studyThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 1994
- Comparative audit of colorectal resection with the POSSUM scoring systemBritish Journal of Surgery, 1994
- Comparative audit: Fact versus fantasyBritish Journal of Surgery, 1993
- Intensive Care Society's APACHE II study in Britain and Ireland--II: Outcome comparisons of intensive care units after adjustment for case mix by the American APACHE II method.BMJ, 1993
- Comparison of POSSUM with APACHE II for prediction of outcome from a surgical high-dependency unitBritish Journal of Surgery, 1992
- The Double Edge of KnowledgePublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1991
- POSSUM: A scoring system for surgical auditBritish Journal of Surgery, 1991
- Medical audit data: counting is not enough.BMJ, 1990
- Assessing Risk AssessmentPublished by Springer Nature ,1985