Cargando…

Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity

Background. Postoperative morbidity has immediate and delayed consequences for surgical patients, including excess risk of premature death. Capturing these data objectively and routinely in large electronic databases using tools such as the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS) would offer tremendou...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Patel, Amour B.U., Reyes, Anna, Ackland, Gareth L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PeerJ Inc. 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4699777/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26734505
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1466
_version_ 1782408229322489856
author Patel, Amour B.U.
Reyes, Anna
Ackland, Gareth L.
author_facet Patel, Amour B.U.
Reyes, Anna
Ackland, Gareth L.
author_sort Patel, Amour B.U.
collection PubMed
description Background. Postoperative morbidity has immediate and delayed consequences for surgical patients, including excess risk of premature death. Capturing these data objectively and routinely in large electronic databases using tools such as the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS) would offer tremendous clinical and translational potential. However, POMS has thus far only utilised prospective data collection by research staff. We hypothesised that retrospective data collection from routinely collated hospital data from paper and electronic charts, medical and nursing notes was non-inferior to prospective data collection requiring research staff capturing POMS-defined morbidity in real-time. Methods. Morbidity was recorded by a trained investigator as defined by POMS prospectively on postoperative days 3 and 7. Separately, an independent investigator blinded to prospectively acquired data retrospectively assessed the same patients’ morbidity as defined by POMS criteria, using medical charts, nursing summaries and electronic data. Equivalence was accepted when the confidence limits for both modes of data collection fell completely inside the equivalence bounds, with the maximum equivalence difference (i.e., the largest value of the difference in sensitivities deemed to reach a conclusion of equivalence) set a priori at 0.2. Differences for confidence limits between retrospective and prospective data collection were based on Nam’s RMLE method. The relationship between morbidity on postoperative day 3 as recorded by each data collection method on time to become morbidity free and length of hospital stay was compared using the log-rank test. Results. POMS data from 85 patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery were analyzed. At postoperative day 3, POMS-defined morbidity was similar regardless of whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively (95% CI [−0.13–0.013]; p < 0.001). Non-inferiority for sensitivity was observed for all other POMS domains and timepoints. Time to become morbidity free Kaplan–Meier plots were indistinguishable between POMS obtained prospectively or retrospectively (hazard ratio: 1.09 (95% CI [0.76–1.57]); p = 0.33, log rank test). Similarly, the mode of data collection did not alter the association between early postoperative morbidity on postoperative day 3 and delayed hospital discharge. Conclusions. Postoperative morbidity as defined by the Post Operative Morbidity Survey can be assessed retrospectively. These data may therefore be easily captured using electronic patient record systems, thereby expanding the potential for bioinformatics approaches to generate new clinical and translational insights into recovery from surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4699777
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46997772016-01-05 Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity Patel, Amour B.U. Reyes, Anna Ackland, Gareth L. PeerJ Anaesthesiology and Pain Management Background. Postoperative morbidity has immediate and delayed consequences for surgical patients, including excess risk of premature death. Capturing these data objectively and routinely in large electronic databases using tools such as the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS) would offer tremendous clinical and translational potential. However, POMS has thus far only utilised prospective data collection by research staff. We hypothesised that retrospective data collection from routinely collated hospital data from paper and electronic charts, medical and nursing notes was non-inferior to prospective data collection requiring research staff capturing POMS-defined morbidity in real-time. Methods. Morbidity was recorded by a trained investigator as defined by POMS prospectively on postoperative days 3 and 7. Separately, an independent investigator blinded to prospectively acquired data retrospectively assessed the same patients’ morbidity as defined by POMS criteria, using medical charts, nursing summaries and electronic data. Equivalence was accepted when the confidence limits for both modes of data collection fell completely inside the equivalence bounds, with the maximum equivalence difference (i.e., the largest value of the difference in sensitivities deemed to reach a conclusion of equivalence) set a priori at 0.2. Differences for confidence limits between retrospective and prospective data collection were based on Nam’s RMLE method. The relationship between morbidity on postoperative day 3 as recorded by each data collection method on time to become morbidity free and length of hospital stay was compared using the log-rank test. Results. POMS data from 85 patients undergoing elective or emergency surgery were analyzed. At postoperative day 3, POMS-defined morbidity was similar regardless of whether data were collected prospectively or retrospectively (95% CI [−0.13–0.013]; p < 0.001). Non-inferiority for sensitivity was observed for all other POMS domains and timepoints. Time to become morbidity free Kaplan–Meier plots were indistinguishable between POMS obtained prospectively or retrospectively (hazard ratio: 1.09 (95% CI [0.76–1.57]); p = 0.33, log rank test). Similarly, the mode of data collection did not alter the association between early postoperative morbidity on postoperative day 3 and delayed hospital discharge. Conclusions. Postoperative morbidity as defined by the Post Operative Morbidity Survey can be assessed retrospectively. These data may therefore be easily captured using electronic patient record systems, thereby expanding the potential for bioinformatics approaches to generate new clinical and translational insights into recovery from surgery. PeerJ Inc. 2015-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4699777/ /pubmed/26734505 http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1466 Text en © 2015 Patel et al. http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Open Government License (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/) .
spellingShingle Anaesthesiology and Pain Management
Patel, Amour B.U.
Reyes, Anna
Ackland, Gareth L.
Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity
title Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity
title_full Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity
title_fullStr Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity
title_full_unstemmed Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity
title_short Non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity
title_sort non-inferiority of retrospective data collection for assessing perioperative morbidity
topic Anaesthesiology and Pain Management
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4699777/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26734505
http://dx.doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1466
work_keys_str_mv AT patelamourbu noninferiorityofretrospectivedatacollectionforassessingperioperativemorbidity
AT reyesanna noninferiorityofretrospectivedatacollectionforassessingperioperativemorbidity
AT acklandgarethl noninferiorityofretrospectivedatacollectionforassessingperioperativemorbidity