One-year audit of complaints made against a University Hospital Surgical Department.

BACKGROUND: There is relatively little in the medical literature relating to complaints about the healthcare process. The aim of this study was to report the frequency and content of patient complaints against a University Hospital Surgical Department. In particular, the study aimed to relate the number of complaints to the number of health-care episodes and to determine the frequency of patient safety incidents and subsequent medico-legal action. METHODS: Retrospective interrogation of a prospectively maintained Complaints Department database at a University Hospital for the calendar year 2009. RESULTS: Complaints relating to 360 aspects of the health-care journey in 113 patients were made. This translated into one complaint per 400 health-care episodes. Concerns about clinical care were cited in 31%, delays in the health-care process in 30%, communication issues in 19%, the institutional environment in 8% and poor discharge planning in 6%. Overall, 16 complaints (4%) were raised as patient safety incidents. Eighty-three per cent of complaints were addressed by a telephone conversation or a single letter response, 13% by a face-to-face meeting. Two per cent resulted in subsequent medico-legal action. CONCLUSIONS: Although perceived in a negative way by health-care professionals, only 1 in 400 health-care episodes resulted in a complaint. Only a small number related to patient safety incidents or resulted in medico-legal instructions. Attention should focus on developing effective strategies to improve patient satisfaction with all aspects of the patient journey.

A review of factors predicting perioperative death and early outcome in hepatopancreaticobiliary cancer surgery.

OBJECTIVES: In the context of comparisons of surgical outcomes, risk adjustment is the retrospective adjustment of a provider's or a surgeon's results for case mix and/or hospital volume. It allows accurate, meaningful inter-provider comparison. It is therefore an essential component of any audit and quality improvement process. The aim of this study was to review the literature to identify those factors known to affect prognosis in hepatobiliary and pancreatic cancer surgery. METHODS: PubMed was used to identify studies assessing risk in patients undergoing resection surgery, rather than bypass surgery, for hepatobiliary and pancreatic cancer. RESULTS: In total, 63 and 68 papers, pertaining to 24 609 and 63 654 patients who underwent hepatic or pancreatic resection for malignancy, respectively, were identified. Overall, 22 generic preoperative factors predicting outcome on multivariate analysis, including demographics, blood results, preoperative biliary drainage and co-morbidities, were identified, with tumour characteristics proving disease-specific factors. Operative duration, transfusion, operative extent, vascular resection and additional intra-abdominal procedures were also found to be predictive of early outcome. CONCLUSIONS: The development of a risk adjustment model will allow for the identification of those factors with most influence on early outcome and will thus identify potential targets for preoperative optimization and allow for the development of a multicentre risk prediction model.

The clinical risk score: emerging as a reliable preoperative prognostic index in hepatectomy for colorectal metastases.

HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to examine the validity of the clinical risk score (CRS), a prognostic tool developed by Fong et al, when translated to another center. DESIGN: This study assesses 5 independent preoperative prognostic criteria, nodal status of the primary lesion, disease-free interval, number of hepatic metastases, size of the largest metastasis, and preoperative carcinoembryonic antigen level, to determine a preoperative CRS for each patient included in the study. SETTING: The hepatobiliary unit of The Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide, South Australia. PATIENTS: Medical records of patients admitted to The Queen Elizabeth Hospital undergoing potentially curative hepatic resection for colorectal metastases during the period of July 1993 to April 2003 were included in the study. Main Outcome Measure The primary outcome measure of the study was survival. The calculated CRS was analyzed with respect to patient postoperative survival. RESULTS: During the 10-year period, 77 patients underwent hepatic resection. Overall survival rates for 1, 3, and 5 years were found to be 80.9%, 57.5%, and 42.3%, respectively. One- and 5-year survival rates for CRSs of 0 and 1 were found to be 93.8% and 72.5%, respectively; for scores of 2 and 3, 76.6% and 31.2%, respectively;and for scores of 4 and 5, 75% and 0%, respectively. No patient with a CRS greater than 3 survived more than 2 years. CONCLUSION: This study validates the CRS, finding it to be highly predictive of patient outcome and survival.