The American surgeon
-
The American surgeon · Nov 2012
Does Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II provide a valid metric to directly compare disease severity in trauma versus surgical intensive care unit patients?
The Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE II) score has never been validated to risk-adjust between critically ill trauma (TICU) and general surgical (SICU) intensive care unit patients, yet it is commonly used for such a purpose. To study this, we evaluated risk of death in TICU and SICU patients with pneumonia. We hypothesized that mortality for a given APACHE II would be significantly different and that using APACHE II to directly compare TICU and SICU patients would not be appropriate. ⋯ APACHE II fails to provide a valid metric to directly compare the severity of disease between TICU and SICU patients with pneumonia. These groups represent distinct populations and should be separated when benchmarking outcomes or creating performance metrics in ICU patients. Improved severity scoring systems are needed to conduct clinically relevant and methodologically valid comparisons between these unique groups.
-
The purpose of this report is to discuss surgical adverse event lessons learned and to recommend action. Examples of incorrect surgical adverse events managed in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) patient safety system and results of a survey regarding the impact of the surgery lessons learned process are provided. The VHA implemented a process for sharing deidentified stories of surgical lessons learned. ⋯ Simply having a policy will not ensure patient safety. When reviewing adverse events, human factors must be considered as a cause for error and for the failure to follow policy without assigning blame. VHA surgeons reported that the surgery lessons learned were valuable and impacted practice.