• Angela H Kuhnen, Peter W Marcello, Patricia L Roberts, Thomas E Read, David J Schoetz, Lawrence C Rusin, Jason F Hall, and Rocco Ricciardi.
• Department of Colorectal Surgery, Lahey Clinic, Burlington, Massachusetts.
• Dis. Colon Rectum. 2015 Feb 1;58(2):247-53.

BackgroundEfforts to improve the quality of surgical care and reduce morbidity and mortality have resulted in outcomes reporting at the service and institutional level. Surgeon-specific outcomes are not readily available.ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to compare surgeon-specific outcomes from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program and 100% capture institutional quality data.DesignWe conducted a cohort study evaluating institutional and surgeon-specific outcomes following colorectal surgery procedures at 1 institution over 5 years.PatientsAll patients who underwent an operation by a colorectal surgeon at Lahey Hospital & Medical Center from January 1, 2008 through December 31, 2012 were identified.Main Outcome MeasuresThirty-day mortality, reoperation, urinary tract infection, deep vein thrombosis, pneumonia, superficial surgical site infection, and organ space infection were the primary outcomes measured.AnalysisWe compared annual and 5-year institutional and surgeon-specific adverse event rates between the data sets. In addition, we categorized individual surgeons as low-outlier, average, or high-outlier in relation to aggregate averages and determined the concordance between the data sets in identifying outliers. Concordance was designated if the 2 databases classified outlier status similarly for the same adverse event category.ResultsIn the 100% capture institutional data, 6459 operative encounters were identified in comparison with 1786 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program encounters (28% sampled). Annual aggregate adverse event rates were similar between the institutional data and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. For annual surgeon-specific comparisons, concordance in identifying outliers between the 2 data sets was 51.4%, and gross discordance between outlier status was in 8.2%. Five-year surgeon-specific comparisons demonstrated 59% concordance in identifying outlier status with 8.2% gross discordance for the group.LimitationsThe inclusion of data from only 1 academic referral center is a limitation of this study.ConclusionsEach surgeon was identified as a "high outlier" in at least 1 adverse event category. Comparisons at the annual and 5-year points demonstrated poor concordance between our 100% capture institutional data and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data.

23 keywords...

hide…