An institutional analysis of unplanned return to the operating room to identify areas for quality improvement

Yihan Lin, Robert A. Meguid, Patrick W. Hosokawa, William G. Henderson, Karl E. Hammermeister, Richard D. Schulick, Ryan C. Shelstad, Trevor T. Wild, Robert C. McIntyre

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background Unplanned return to the operating room (uROR) has been suggested as a hospital quality indicator. The purpose of this study was to determine reasons for uROR to identify opportunities for patient care improvement. Methods uROR reported by our institution's American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program underwent secondary review. Results The uROR rate reported by clinical reviewers was 4.3%. Secondary review re-categorized 64.7% as “true uROR” with the most common reasons for uROR being infection (30.9%) and bleeding (23.6%). Remaining cases were categorized as “false uROR” with the most common reasons being inadequate documentation (60.0%) and not directly related to index procedure (16.7%). Conclusions Strict adherence to NSQIP definitions results in misidentification of true uROR. This raises concerns for using NSQIP-identified uROR as a hospital quality metric. Improved processes of care to prevent infection and hemorrhage at our institution could reduce the rate of true uROR.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-6
Number of pages6
JournalAmerican journal of surgery
Volume214
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 2017

Keywords

  • ACS
  • NSQIP
  • Quality improvement
  • Reoperation
  • Unplanned return to the operating room

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'An institutional analysis of unplanned return to the operating room to identify areas for quality improvement'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this