On-line variable live-adjusted displays with internal and external risk-adjusted mortalities. A valuable method for benchmarking and early detection of unfavourable trends in cardiac surgery.

OBJECTIVE Benchmarking and early detection of unfavourable trends. METHODS We implemented a dedicated project-orientated data warehouse, which continuously supplies data for on-line computing of the variable live-adjusted displays (VLADs). To calculate the expected cumulative mortality, we used the multi-variate logistic regression model of the EuroSCORE model. In addition to the external EuroSCORE standard, we calculated a centre-specific risk score for internal standards by analysing the data of 9135 patients, which enables both internal and external comparisons. The VLADs are embedded into the multi-purpose web-based information portal, so that the physicians can investigate several types of VLADs interactively: performance of different types of surgery and individual surgeons for different time intervals. We investigated clinically important events such as modification of operative techniques and personnel changes of the team by the VLADs. RESULTS We found transient declines in the performance curves during major changes in patient management, indicating that systemic--rather than accidental or patient related factors--were involved in the mortality risk. The internal standard line represents these clusters more clearly than the external line. We evaluated examples of how periods of increased risk could be monitored by the VLAD curves: (1) the introduction of OPCAB surgery; (2) training of surgeons; (3) staff changes and staff-related management. CONCLUSIONS On-line VLADs based on a day-to-day updated database, displaying both internal and external standards, are a helpful visualisation tool for earlier detection of unfavourable trends. They enable the surgeon teams and clinical management to take countermeasures at an early stage.

[1]  B. Arnrich,et al.  Creatinine clearance versus serum creatinine as a risk factor in cardiac surgery , 2003, BMC surgery.

[2]  S. Nashef,et al.  The relationship between predicted and actual cardiac surgical mortality: impact of risk grouping and individual surgeons. , 2001, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[3]  S Gallivan,et al.  Likely variations in perioperative mortality associated with cardiac surgery: when does high mortality reflect bad practice? , 2000, Heart.

[4]  C. Vincent Understanding and responding to adverse events. , 2003, The New England journal of medicine.

[5]  R. Hetzer,et al.  Risk Stratification Scores for Predicting Mortality in Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery , 2002, The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon.

[6]  J. Borrás,et al.  Cardiac surgical mortality: comparison among different additive risk-scoring models in a multicenter sample. , 1998, Archives of surgery.

[7]  T. Treasure,et al.  Training surgeons and safeguarding patients. , 1996, Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

[8]  Chris Sherlaw-Johnson,et al.  Monitoring the results of cardiac surgery by variable life-adjusted display , 1997, The Lancet.

[9]  A F Mackintosh,et al.  Use of cumulative mortality data in patients with acute myocardial infarction for early detection of variation in clinical practice: observational study , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[10]  I. Birdi,et al.  Effect of surgical training on outcome and hospital costs in coronary surgery , 2001, Heart.

[11]  F. Sebening,et al.  Multicentric Quality Assurance in Cardiac Surgery , 1990 .

[12]  P Littlejohns,et al.  Cumulative risk adjusted mortality chart for detecting changes in death rate: observational study of heart surgery , 1998, BMJ.

[13]  E. Blackstone,et al.  Validation and interdependence with patient-variables of the influence of procedural variables on early and late survival after CABG. K.U. Leuven Coronary Surgery Program. , 1997, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[14]  R J Cook,et al.  Risk-Adjusted Monitoring of Binary Surgical Outcomes , 2001, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[15]  E. Blackstone,et al.  Closing the loop: optimizing physicians' operational and strategic behavior. , 1999, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[16]  B. Meyns,et al.  La critique est aisée mais l'art est difficile. [Criticism is easy but the method is hard; comment]. , 1997, Lancet.

[17]  O. Valencia,et al.  Risk Stratification for Training in Cardiac Surgery1 , 2001, The Thoracic and cardiovascular surgeon.

[18]  C. Vahl,et al.  The meaning of early mortality after CABG. , 1999, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[19]  R Rayman,et al.  Cumulative sum failure analysis of a policy change from on-pump to off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting. , 2001, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[20]  B. Meyns,et al.  Single centre, single domain validation of the EuroSCORE on a consecutive sample of primary and repeat CABG. , 2001, European journal of cardio-thoracic surgery : official journal of the European Association for Cardio-thoracic Surgery.

[21]  L. Stitt,et al.  The Learning Curve of an Academic Cardiac Surgeon: Use of the CUSUM Method , 1999 .

[22]  N. Kouchoukos Quality initiatives and the power of the database: where we stand. , 1995, The Annals of thoracic surgery.

[23]  R. Salamon,et al.  Risk factors and outcome in European cardiac surgery : analysis of the EuroSCORE multinational database of 19030 patients q , 1999 .

[24]  M R de Leval,et al.  Analysis of a cluster of surgical failures. Application to a series of neonatal arterial switch operations. , 1994, The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery.