Cargando…

Postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? A cohort study based on Norwegian hospital administrative data

OBJECTIVES: Postoperative wound dehiscence (PWD) is a serious complication to laparotomy, leading to higher mortality, readmissions and cost. The aims of the present study are to investigate whether risk adjusted PWD rates could reliably differentiate between Norwegian hospitals, and whether PWD rat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Helgeland, Jon, Tomic, Oliver, Hansen, Tonya Moen, Kristoffersen, Doris Tove, Hassani, Sahar, Lindahl, Anne Karin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6500227/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30948604
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026422
_version_ 1783415907277602816
author Helgeland, Jon
Tomic, Oliver
Hansen, Tonya Moen
Kristoffersen, Doris Tove
Hassani, Sahar
Lindahl, Anne Karin
author_facet Helgeland, Jon
Tomic, Oliver
Hansen, Tonya Moen
Kristoffersen, Doris Tove
Hassani, Sahar
Lindahl, Anne Karin
author_sort Helgeland, Jon
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Postoperative wound dehiscence (PWD) is a serious complication to laparotomy, leading to higher mortality, readmissions and cost. The aims of the present study are to investigate whether risk adjusted PWD rates could reliably differentiate between Norwegian hospitals, and whether PWD rates were associated with hospital characteristics such as hospital type and laparotomy volume. DESIGN: Observational study using patient administrative data from all Norwegian hospitals, obtained from the Norwegian Patient Registry, for the period 2011–2015, and linked using the unique person identification number. PARTICIPANTS: All patients undergoing laparotomy, aged at least 15 years, with length of stay at least 2 days and no diagnosis code for immunocompromised state or relating to pregnancy, childbirth and puerperium. The final data set comprised 66 925 patients with 78 086 laparotomy episodes from 47 hospitals. OUTCOMES: The outcome was wound dehiscence, identified by the presence of a wound reclosure code, risk adjusted for patient characteristics and operation type. RESULTS: The final data set comprised 1477 wound dehiscences. Crude PWD rates varied from 0% to 5.1% among hospitals, with an overall rate of 1.89%. Three hospitals with statistically significantly higher PWD than average were identified, after case mix adjustment and correction for multiple comparisons. Hospital volume was not associated with PWD rate, except that hospitals with very few laparotomies had lower PWD rates. CONCLUSIONS: Among Norwegian hospitals, there is considerable variation in PWD rate that cannot be explained by operation type, age or comorbidity. This warrants further investigation into possible causes, such as surgical technique, perioperative procedures or handling of complications. The risk adjusted PWD rate after laparotomy is a candidate quality indicator for Norwegian hospitals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6500227
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65002272019-05-21 Postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? A cohort study based on Norwegian hospital administrative data Helgeland, Jon Tomic, Oliver Hansen, Tonya Moen Kristoffersen, Doris Tove Hassani, Sahar Lindahl, Anne Karin BMJ Open Surgery OBJECTIVES: Postoperative wound dehiscence (PWD) is a serious complication to laparotomy, leading to higher mortality, readmissions and cost. The aims of the present study are to investigate whether risk adjusted PWD rates could reliably differentiate between Norwegian hospitals, and whether PWD rates were associated with hospital characteristics such as hospital type and laparotomy volume. DESIGN: Observational study using patient administrative data from all Norwegian hospitals, obtained from the Norwegian Patient Registry, for the period 2011–2015, and linked using the unique person identification number. PARTICIPANTS: All patients undergoing laparotomy, aged at least 15 years, with length of stay at least 2 days and no diagnosis code for immunocompromised state or relating to pregnancy, childbirth and puerperium. The final data set comprised 66 925 patients with 78 086 laparotomy episodes from 47 hospitals. OUTCOMES: The outcome was wound dehiscence, identified by the presence of a wound reclosure code, risk adjusted for patient characteristics and operation type. RESULTS: The final data set comprised 1477 wound dehiscences. Crude PWD rates varied from 0% to 5.1% among hospitals, with an overall rate of 1.89%. Three hospitals with statistically significantly higher PWD than average were identified, after case mix adjustment and correction for multiple comparisons. Hospital volume was not associated with PWD rate, except that hospitals with very few laparotomies had lower PWD rates. CONCLUSIONS: Among Norwegian hospitals, there is considerable variation in PWD rate that cannot be explained by operation type, age or comorbidity. This warrants further investigation into possible causes, such as surgical technique, perioperative procedures or handling of complications. The risk adjusted PWD rate after laparotomy is a candidate quality indicator for Norwegian hospitals. BMJ Publishing Group 2019-04-03 /pmc/articles/PMC6500227/ /pubmed/30948604 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026422 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Surgery
Helgeland, Jon
Tomic, Oliver
Hansen, Tonya Moen
Kristoffersen, Doris Tove
Hassani, Sahar
Lindahl, Anne Karin
Postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? A cohort study based on Norwegian hospital administrative data
title Postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? A cohort study based on Norwegian hospital administrative data
title_full Postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? A cohort study based on Norwegian hospital administrative data
title_fullStr Postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? A cohort study based on Norwegian hospital administrative data
title_full_unstemmed Postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? A cohort study based on Norwegian hospital administrative data
title_short Postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? A cohort study based on Norwegian hospital administrative data
title_sort postoperative wound dehiscence after laparotomy: a useful healthcare quality indicator? a cohort study based on norwegian hospital administrative data
topic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6500227/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30948604
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026422
work_keys_str_mv AT helgelandjon postoperativewounddehiscenceafterlaparotomyausefulhealthcarequalityindicatoracohortstudybasedonnorwegianhospitaladministrativedata
AT tomicoliver postoperativewounddehiscenceafterlaparotomyausefulhealthcarequalityindicatoracohortstudybasedonnorwegianhospitaladministrativedata
AT hansentonyamoen postoperativewounddehiscenceafterlaparotomyausefulhealthcarequalityindicatoracohortstudybasedonnorwegianhospitaladministrativedata
AT kristoffersendoristove postoperativewounddehiscenceafterlaparotomyausefulhealthcarequalityindicatoracohortstudybasedonnorwegianhospitaladministrativedata
AT hassanisahar postoperativewounddehiscenceafterlaparotomyausefulhealthcarequalityindicatoracohortstudybasedonnorwegianhospitaladministrativedata
AT lindahlannekarin postoperativewounddehiscenceafterlaparotomyausefulhealthcarequalityindicatoracohortstudybasedonnorwegianhospitaladministrativedata