ArticlePloS one2024
A time-adjusted control chart for monitoring surgical outcome variations.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundStatistical Process Control (SPC) tools providing feedback to surgical teams can improve patient outcomes over time. However, the quality of routinely available hospital data used to build these tools does not permit full capture of the influence of patient case-mix. We aimed to demonstrate the value of considering time-related variables in addition to patient case-mix for detection of special cause variations when monitoring surgical outcomes with control charts.
methodsA retrospective analysis from the French nationwide hospital database of 151,588 patients aged 18 and older admitted for colorectal surgery between January 1st, 2014, and December 31st, 2018. GEE multilevel logistic regression models were fitted from the training dataset to predict surgical outcomes (in-patient mortality, intensive care stay and reoperation within 30-day of procedure) and applied on the testing dataset to build control charts. Surgical outcomes were adjusted on patient case-mix only for the classical chart, and additionally on secular (yearly) and seasonal (quarterly) trends for the enhanced control chart. The detection of special cause variations was compared between those charts using the Cohen's Kappa agreement statistic, as well as sensitivity and positive predictive value with the enhanced chart as the reference.
resultsWithin the 5-years monitoring period, 18.9% (28/148) of hospitals detected at least one special cause variation using the classical chart and 19.6% (29/148) using the enhanced chart. 59 special cause variations were detected overall, among which 19 (32.2%) discordances were observed between classical and enhanced charts. The observed Kappa agreement between those charts was 0.89 (95% Confidence Interval [95% CI], 0.78 to 1.00) for detecting mortality variations, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.70 to 0.96) for intensive care stay and 0.67 (95% CI, 0.46 to 0.87) for reoperation. Depending on surgical outcomes, the sensitivity of classical versus enhanced charts in detecting special causes variations ranged from 0.75 to 0.89 and the positive predictive value from 0.60 to 0.89.
conclusionSeasonal and secular trends can be controlled as potential confounders to improve signal detection in surgical outcomes monitoring over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.