Developing a toolkit for comparing safety in spine surgery.

Sohail K. Mirza, Brook I. Martin, Robert Goodkin, Robert Hart, Paul A. Anderson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Safety information in spine surgery is important for informed patient choice and performance-based payment incentives, but measurement methods for surgical safety assessment are not standardized. Published reports of complication rates for common spinal procedures show wide variation. Factors influencing variation may include differences in safety ascertainment methods and procedure types. In a prospective cohort study, adverse events were observed in all patients undergoing spine surgery at two hospitals during a 2-year period. Multiple processes for adverse occurrence surveillance were implemented, and the associations between surveillance methods, surgery invasiveness, and observed frequencies of adverse events were examined. The study enrolled 1,723 patients. Adverse events were noted in 48.3% of the patients. Reviewers classified 25% as minor events and 23% as major events. Of the major events, the daily rounding team reported 38.4% of the events using a voluntary reporting system, surgeons reported 13.4%, and 9.1% were identified during clinical conferences. A review of medical records identified 86.7% of the major adverse events. The adverse events occurred during the inpatient hospitalization for 78.1% of the events, within 30 days for an additional 12.5%, and within the first year for the remaining 9.4%. A unit increase in the invasiveness index was associated with an 8.2% increased risk of a major adverse event. A Current Procedural Terminology-based algorithm for quantifying invasiveness correlated well with medical records-based assessment. Increased procedure invasiveness is associated with an increased risk of adverse events. The observed frequency of adverse events is influenced by the ascertainment modality. Voluntary reports by surgeons and other team members missed more than 50% of the events identified through a medical records review. Increased surgery invasiveness, measured from medical records or billing codes, is quantitatively associated with an increased risk of adverse events.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)271-286
Number of pages16
JournalInstructional course lectures
Volume63
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Spine
Safety
Medical Records
Current Procedural Terminology
Motivation
Inpatients
Hospitalization
Cohort Studies
Prospective Studies
Surgeons

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Mirza, S. K., Martin, B. I., Goodkin, R., Hart, R., & Anderson, P. A. (2014). Developing a toolkit for comparing safety in spine surgery. Instructional course lectures, 63, 271-286.

Developing a toolkit for comparing safety in spine surgery. / Mirza, Sohail K.; Martin, Brook I.; Goodkin, Robert; Hart, Robert; Anderson, Paul A.

In: Instructional course lectures, Vol. 63, 2014, p. 271-286.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mirza, SK, Martin, BI, Goodkin, R, Hart, R & Anderson, PA 2014, 'Developing a toolkit for comparing safety in spine surgery.', Instructional course lectures, vol. 63, pp. 271-286.
Mirza SK, Martin BI, Goodkin R, Hart R, Anderson PA. Developing a toolkit for comparing safety in spine surgery. Instructional course lectures. 2014;63:271-286.
Mirza, Sohail K. ; Martin, Brook I. ; Goodkin, Robert ; Hart, Robert ; Anderson, Paul A. / Developing a toolkit for comparing safety in spine surgery. In: Instructional course lectures. 2014 ; Vol. 63. pp. 271-286.
@article{e42211c1bafc48e8857e6e4bfbb02c5e,
title = "Developing a toolkit for comparing safety in spine surgery.",
abstract = "Safety information in spine surgery is important for informed patient choice and performance-based payment incentives, but measurement methods for surgical safety assessment are not standardized. Published reports of complication rates for common spinal procedures show wide variation. Factors influencing variation may include differences in safety ascertainment methods and procedure types. In a prospective cohort study, adverse events were observed in all patients undergoing spine surgery at two hospitals during a 2-year period. Multiple processes for adverse occurrence surveillance were implemented, and the associations between surveillance methods, surgery invasiveness, and observed frequencies of adverse events were examined. The study enrolled 1,723 patients. Adverse events were noted in 48.3{\%} of the patients. Reviewers classified 25{\%} as minor events and 23{\%} as major events. Of the major events, the daily rounding team reported 38.4{\%} of the events using a voluntary reporting system, surgeons reported 13.4{\%}, and 9.1{\%} were identified during clinical conferences. A review of medical records identified 86.7{\%} of the major adverse events. The adverse events occurred during the inpatient hospitalization for 78.1{\%} of the events, within 30 days for an additional 12.5{\%}, and within the first year for the remaining 9.4{\%}. A unit increase in the invasiveness index was associated with an 8.2{\%} increased risk of a major adverse event. A Current Procedural Terminology-based algorithm for quantifying invasiveness correlated well with medical records-based assessment. Increased procedure invasiveness is associated with an increased risk of adverse events. The observed frequency of adverse events is influenced by the ascertainment modality. Voluntary reports by surgeons and other team members missed more than 50{\%} of the events identified through a medical records review. Increased surgery invasiveness, measured from medical records or billing codes, is quantitatively associated with an increased risk of adverse events.",
author = "Mirza, {Sohail K.} and Martin, {Brook I.} and Robert Goodkin and Robert Hart and Anderson, {Paul A.}",
year = "2014",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "63",
pages = "271--286",
journal = "Instructional course lectures",
issn = "0065-6895",
publisher = "American Association of Orthopaedic Surgeons",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Developing a toolkit for comparing safety in spine surgery.

AU - Mirza, Sohail K.

AU - Martin, Brook I.

AU - Goodkin, Robert

AU - Hart, Robert

AU - Anderson, Paul A.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Safety information in spine surgery is important for informed patient choice and performance-based payment incentives, but measurement methods for surgical safety assessment are not standardized. Published reports of complication rates for common spinal procedures show wide variation. Factors influencing variation may include differences in safety ascertainment methods and procedure types. In a prospective cohort study, adverse events were observed in all patients undergoing spine surgery at two hospitals during a 2-year period. Multiple processes for adverse occurrence surveillance were implemented, and the associations between surveillance methods, surgery invasiveness, and observed frequencies of adverse events were examined. The study enrolled 1,723 patients. Adverse events were noted in 48.3% of the patients. Reviewers classified 25% as minor events and 23% as major events. Of the major events, the daily rounding team reported 38.4% of the events using a voluntary reporting system, surgeons reported 13.4%, and 9.1% were identified during clinical conferences. A review of medical records identified 86.7% of the major adverse events. The adverse events occurred during the inpatient hospitalization for 78.1% of the events, within 30 days for an additional 12.5%, and within the first year for the remaining 9.4%. A unit increase in the invasiveness index was associated with an 8.2% increased risk of a major adverse event. A Current Procedural Terminology-based algorithm for quantifying invasiveness correlated well with medical records-based assessment. Increased procedure invasiveness is associated with an increased risk of adverse events. The observed frequency of adverse events is influenced by the ascertainment modality. Voluntary reports by surgeons and other team members missed more than 50% of the events identified through a medical records review. Increased surgery invasiveness, measured from medical records or billing codes, is quantitatively associated with an increased risk of adverse events.

AB - Safety information in spine surgery is important for informed patient choice and performance-based payment incentives, but measurement methods for surgical safety assessment are not standardized. Published reports of complication rates for common spinal procedures show wide variation. Factors influencing variation may include differences in safety ascertainment methods and procedure types. In a prospective cohort study, adverse events were observed in all patients undergoing spine surgery at two hospitals during a 2-year period. Multiple processes for adverse occurrence surveillance were implemented, and the associations between surveillance methods, surgery invasiveness, and observed frequencies of adverse events were examined. The study enrolled 1,723 patients. Adverse events were noted in 48.3% of the patients. Reviewers classified 25% as minor events and 23% as major events. Of the major events, the daily rounding team reported 38.4% of the events using a voluntary reporting system, surgeons reported 13.4%, and 9.1% were identified during clinical conferences. A review of medical records identified 86.7% of the major adverse events. The adverse events occurred during the inpatient hospitalization for 78.1% of the events, within 30 days for an additional 12.5%, and within the first year for the remaining 9.4%. A unit increase in the invasiveness index was associated with an 8.2% increased risk of a major adverse event. A Current Procedural Terminology-based algorithm for quantifying invasiveness correlated well with medical records-based assessment. Increased procedure invasiveness is associated with an increased risk of adverse events. The observed frequency of adverse events is influenced by the ascertainment modality. Voluntary reports by surgeons and other team members missed more than 50% of the events identified through a medical records review. Increased surgery invasiveness, measured from medical records or billing codes, is quantitatively associated with an increased risk of adverse events.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84906954283&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84906954283&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 24720313

AN - SCOPUS:84906954283

VL - 63

SP - 271

EP - 286

JO - Instructional course lectures

JF - Instructional course lectures

SN - 0065-6895

ER -