ArticleWorld journal of surgery2018
Measuring Outcomes of Clinical Care: Victorian Emergency Laparotomy Audit Using Quality Investigator.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Protocolized care pathways in emergency general surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The British journal of surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Magnitude of in-hospital mortality and its associated factors among patients undergone laparotomy at tertiary public hospitals, West Oromia, Ethiopia, 2022.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Acute care nurses' experience in providing evidence-based care for patients with laparotomy wounds: A scoping review.International wound journal · 2024Article
- Increasing the use of perioperative risk scoring in emergency laparotomy: nationwide quality improvement programme.BJS open · 2022Article
- The Value of Reporting Perioperative Mortality Rates (POMR).World journal of surgery · 2021Article
- Volume and in-hospital mortality after emergency abdominal surgery: a national population-based study.BMJ open · 2019Article
- Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Australian and New Zealand Audit of Surgical Mortality (ANZASM) National Report 2015 found that within the cohort of audited deaths, 85% were emergencies with acute life-threatening conditions, and by far, the most common procedures were laparotomy and colorectal procedures. Emergency laparotomy outcomes have shown improvement through audit and reporting in the UK. The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of emergency laparotomy in the state of Victoria, Australia.
methodThe Dr Foster Quality Investigator (DFQI) database was interrogated for a set of Australian Classification of Health Intervention (ACHI) codes defined by the authors as representing an emergency laparotomy. The dataset included patients who underwent emergency laparotomy from July 2007 to July 2016 in all Victorian hospitals.
resultsThere were 23,115 emergency laparotomies conducted over 9 years in 66 hospitals. Inpatient mortality was 2036/23,115 (8.8%). Mortality in the adult population increased with age and reached 18.1% in those patients that were 80 years or older. 51.3% were females, and there was no significant difference in survival between genders. Patients with no recorded comorbidities had a mortality of 4.3%, whereas those with > 5 comorbidities had 19.3% mortality.
conclusionAdministrative data accessed via a tool such as DFQI can provide useful population data to guide further evidence-based improvement strategies. The mortality for emergency laparotomy within Victorian hospitals is comparable, if not better than that seen in overseas studies. There is a need to continue routine audit of mortality rates and implement systems improvement where necessary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29282514What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.