Frailty and Long-Term Mortality Following Emergency Laparotomy: A Comparison Between the 11-Item and 5-Item Modified Frailty Indices.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency laparotomy (EL) is a high-risk operation which is increasingly performed on an aging patient population. Objective frailty assessment using a validated index has the potential to improve preoperative risk stratification. This study aimed to assess the correlation between frailty and long-term mortality and morbidity outcomes for older EL patients. Secondary aims were to compare the 11-item and shortened five-item modified frailty indices (mFIs) in terms of value and predictive validity. METHODS: A prospective multicenter observational study of patients aged ≥55 y undergoing EL was conducted across five hospitals in New Zealand between 2017 and 2022. Frailty was measured using the 11-item and abbreviated five-item mFIs. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine whether frailty was independently associated with one-year postoperative mortality and other morbidity outcomes. Correlation between the two frailty indices were assessed with the Spearman's correlation coefficient (P). RESULTS: Frailty assessments were performed in 861 participants, with the prevalence being 18.7% and 29.8% using the 11-item and five-item mFIs, respectively. Both frailty indices demonstrated similar associations with one-year mortality (two-fold increased risk), major complications, admission to intensive care unit, rehabilitation, and 30-d readmission. The 11-item mFI demonstrated a greater association with early mortality (four-fold increased risk), reoperations, and increased length of stay compared with the five-item frailty index. Spearman P was 0.6 (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Frailty, as identified by the 11-item and five-item mFIs, was associated with one-year mortality and other important morbidity outcomes for older EL patients. These forms of frailty assessment provide important information that may aid in risk assessment and patient-centered decision-making.

Frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale to predict short- and long-term adverse outcomes following emergency laparotomy: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomy has high morbidity and mortality rates. Frailty assessment remains underutilized in this setting, in part due to time constraints and feasibility. The Clinical Frailty Scale has been identified as the most appropriate tool for frailty assessment in emergency laparotomy patients and is recommended for all older patients undergoing emergency laparotomy. The prognostic impact of measured frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale on short- and long-term mortality and morbidity rates remains to be determined. METHODS: Observational cohort studies were identified by systematically searching Medline, Embase, Scopus and CENTRAL databases up to February 2024, comparing outcomes following emergency laparotomy for frail and non-frail participants defined according to the Clinical Frailty Scale. The primary outcomes were short- and long-term mortality rates. A random-effects model was created with pooling of effect estimates and a separate narrative synthesis was created. Risk of bias was assessed. RESULTS: Twelve articles comprising 5704 patients were included. Frailty prevalence was 25% in all patients and 32% in older adults (age ≥55 years). Older patients with frailty had a significantly greater risk of postoperative death (30-day mortality rate OR 3.84, 95% c.i. 2.90 to 5.09, 1-year mortality rate OR 3.03, 95% c.i. 2.17 to 4.23). Meta-regression revealed that variations in cut-off values to define frailty did not significantly affect the association with frailty and 30-day mortality rate. Frailty was associated with higher rates of major complications (OR 1.93, 95% c.i. 1.27 to 2.93) and discharge to an increased level of care. CONCLUSION: Frailty is significantly correlated with short- and long-term mortality rates following emergency laparotomy, as well as an adverse morbidity rate and functional outcomes. Identifying frailty using the Clinical Frailty Scale may aid in patient-centred decision-making and implementation of tailored care strategies for these 'high-risk' patients, with the aim of reducing adverse outcomes following emergency laparotomy.

The impact of myosteatosis on postoperative outcomes and survival of patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for suspected/confirmed malignancy.

Backgrounds/Aims: While the effects of myosteatosis are emerging, the evidence for its use as a predictor of outcomes in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) still needs to be established. The study aims to evaluate the effect of myosteatosis on the short- and long-term outcomes of PD. Methods: We analyzed the effect of myosteatosis on the short- and long-term outcomes of patients who underwent PD between July 2006 and May 2013. Myosteatosis was measured retrospectively from preoperative computed tomography (CT) at the L3 vertebra level, and dichotomized as a binary exposure variable as < 38.5 Hounsfield unit (HU) for males, and < 36.1 HU for females. Results: A total of 214 patient (median age 62 years, range: 41-80 years) CTs were analyzed for myosteatosis. Overall, 120/214 (56.1%) patients were classed as having myosteatosis. Both groups had similar comorbidity profiles. The presence of myosteatosis was not shown to increase the rate of any short- or long-term complication. However, pancreatic leak (29.8% vs. 13.3%; p = 0.006) and postoperative bleeding (13.8% vs. 5.0%; p = 0.034) were higher in the non-myosteatosis group. The median intensive care (2 days) and hospital stay (12 days) were the same in both groups. The 30-day mortality (myosteatosis: 3.3% vs. non-myosteatosis: 3.2%; p = 0.95), and 5-year overall survival (myosteatosis: 26.7% vs. non-myosteatosis: 31.9%; p = 0.5), were similar in both groups. Conclusions: We have found no evidence supporting myosteatosis affecting either the short-term or long-term outcomes of patients undergoing PD for suspected/confirmed malignant tumors.

Quality performance indicators for oesophageal and gastric cancer: ANZ expert Delphi consensus.

BACKGROUND: Quality performance indicators for the management of oesophagogastric cancer can be used to objectively measure and compare the performance of individual units and capture key elements of patient care to improve patient outcomes. METHODS: Two systematic reviews were completed to identify evidence-based quality performance indicators for the surgical management of oesophagogastric cancer. Based on the indicators identified, a two-round modified Delphi process with invitations was sent to all members of the Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand Gastric and Oesophageal Surgery Association. The expert working group discussed each suggested indicator and either removed, added, or adjusted the list of indicators of oesophagogastric cancer. RESULTS: The final list of both OG cancer indicators included Specialized Multi-disciplinary team discussion, Endoscopy documentation, Staging Contrast CT Chest/Abdomen and Pelvis, Neoadjuvant or Adjuvant chemo/radiotherapy administered in accordance with the Local multi-disciplinary team, Pathological margin clearance (R0 Resection), Lymphadenectomy retrieving 15 or more nodes, Formal review of pathological findings and documentation, Postoperative complications, 30-day and 90-day postoperative mortality, clinical surveillance and Specialized Dietetic guidance. Indicators specific to gastric cancer included Preoperative biopsy for pathological diagnosis and Staging Laparoscopy. Indicators specific to oesophageal cancer include positron emission tomography scan if CT negative for metastasis, Perioperative Oesophagectomy Care Pathway, length of stay of 21 days or more, and Unplanned readmission within 30 days. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study present a core set of indicators for the surgical management of oesophagogastric cancer that can be used to measure quality and compare performance between different units.

Patient and healthcare practitioner evaluation of patient-reported outcomes in bariatric surgery - a modified Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes are an important emerging metric increasingly utilised in clinical, research and registry settings. These outcomes, while vital, are underutilised and require refinement for the specific patient population of those undergoing bariatric surgery. This study aimed to investigate and compare how pre-surgical patients, post-surgical patients, and healthcare practitioners evaluate patient-reported outcomes of bariatric surgery to identify outcomes that are considered most important. METHODS: A modified Delphi survey was distributed to patients pre- and post-surgery, and to a variety of healthcare practitioners involved in bariatric care. Across two rounds, participants were asked to rate a variety of physical and psychosocial outcomes of bariatric surgery from 0 (Not Important) to 10 (Extremely Important). Outcomes rated 8-10 by at least 70% of participants were considered highly important (prioritised). The highest-rated outcomes were compared between the three groups as well as between medical and allied health practitioner subgroups. RESULTS: 20 pre-surgical patients, 95 post-surgical patients, and 28 healthcare practitioners completed both rounds of the questionnaire. There were 58 outcomes prioritised, with 21 outcomes (out of 90, 23.3%) prioritised by all three groups, 13 (14.4%) by two groups, and 24 (26.7%) prioritised by a single group or subgroup. Unanimously prioritised outcomes included 'Co-morbidities', 'General Physical Health', 'Overall Quality of Life' and 'Overall Mental Health'. Discordant outcomes included 'Fear of Weight Regain', 'Suicidal Thoughts', 'Addictive Behaviours', and 'Experience of Stigma or Discrimination'. CONCLUSION: While there was considerable agreement between stakeholder groups on many outcomes, there remain several outcomes with discordant importance valuations that must be considered. In particular, healthcare practitioners prioritised 20 outcomes that were not prioritised by patients, emphasising the range of priorities across stakeholder groups. Future work will consider these priorities to ensure resulting measures encompass all important outcomes and are beneficial and valid for end users.

A longitudinal study examining the relationship between prioritization scores and changes in impact on life scores in elective surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems globally face the issue of resource constraints and need for prioritization of elective surgery. Inclusive, explicit prioritization tools are important in improving consistency and equity of access to surgery across health systems. The General Surgical Prioritization Tool developed by New Zealand's Ministry of Health scores patients for elective non-cancer surgery based on surgeon's clinical judgement and patient derived Impact on Life (IoL) scores. This study aims to measure the changes in patient derived IoL scores after common general surgical procedures to enable direct comparison and inform future prioritization. METHOD: This longitudinal observational study enrolled 322 participants who had undergone elective general surgical procedures. Participants were contacted 3 to 9 months after their procedures and requested to complete the IoL questionnaire. The primary endpoint was the change in IoL scores after surgery among the different procedures. RESULTS: Overall, 229/304 (75%) participants responded to the questionnaire and there were no significant baseline differences between responders and non-responders. Patients in the gallbladder treatment group had the greatest improvement in IoL scores. Patients across all ethnic groups had similar changes in IoL scores. Multivariate analysis showed that gallbladder surgery (relative to hernia surgery) and pre-surgery IoL scores significantly predicted improvement. CONCLUSION: The patient reported IoL score recorded at prioritization for surgery all reduced, albeit to varying amounts, after common general surgical procedures. This, combined with the fact that IoL scores predicted post-operative improvement support their inclusion in prioritization tools in addition to surgeon derived components.

Association between frailty, long-term mortality and functional outcomes for older adults undergoing emergency laparotomy.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of older patients are undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL). Frailty is thought to contribute to adverse outcomes in this group. The best method to assess frailty and impacts on long-term mortality and other important functional outcomes for older EL patients have not been fully explored. METHODS: A prospective multicenter study of older EL patients was conducted across four hospital sites in New Zealand from August 2017 to September 2022. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) was used to measure frailty-defined as a CFS of ≥5. Primary outcomes were 30-day and one-year mortality. Secondary outcomes were postoperative morbidity, admission for rehabilitation, and increased care level on discharge. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted, adjusting for age, sex, and ethnicity. RESULTS: A total of 629 participants were included. Frailty prevalence was 14.6%. Frail participants demonstrated higher 30-day and 1-year mortality-20.7% and 39.1%. Following adjustment, frailty was directly associated with a significantly increased risk of short- and long-term mortality (30-day aRR 2.6, 95% CI 1.5, 4.3, p = <0.001, 1-year aRR 2.0, 95% CI 1.5, 2.8, p < 0.001). Frailty was correlated with a 2-fold increased risk of admission for rehabilitation and propensity of being discharged to an increased level of care, complications, and readmission within 30 days. CONCLUSION: Frailty was associated with increased risk of postoperative mortality up to 1-year and other functional outcomes for older patients undergoing EL. Identification of frailty in older EL patients aids in patient-centered decision-making, which may lead to improvement in outcomes.

Prevalence of Micronutrient Deficiencies in Preoperative Bariatric Patients in a New Zealand Tertiary Centre.

PURPOSE: A potential complication of bariatric surgery is development of nutritional deficiencies. Study aims were to assess prevalence of micronutrient deficiencies in preoperative bariatric patients and to examine for ethnic differences. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 573 patients that underwent bariatric surgery at Counties Manukau District Health Board was carried out. Mean preoperative levels of albumin, calcium, phosphate, folate, vitamin B12, vitamin D, magnesium, haemoglobin, haematocrit, mean cell volume, mean cell haemoglobin, ferritin, iron, and transferrin were calculated. Chi square, fisher exact test, and multiple logistic regression was used to assess for differences in prevalence of micronutrient deficiencies across ethnicities. RESULTS: The most common micronutrient deficiency was vitamin D (30.85%). There were statistically significant differences in vitamin D deficiency across ethnicities (p < 0.0001). Asians had the highest prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (60%), followed by Pacifica (44.57%), and Maori (31.68%). Asians were more likely to have vitamin D deficiency compared to NZ/Other Europeans (OR = 14.93, p < 0.001). Vitamin D deficiency was associated with higher BMI (OR = 1.05, p = 0.008). The second most common deficiency was iron (21.1%). Asians had the highest prevalence of iron deficiency (44%), followed by Maori (27.95%), and Pacifica (19.57%) (p = 0.0064). Compared to NZ/Other Europeans, Asians (OR = 4.26) and Maori (OR = 1.78) were more likely to be iron deficient (p = 0.004). Female gender was associated with iron deficiency (OR = 2.12, p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: Vitamin D and iron are the most common micronutrient deficiencies among preoperative bariatric patients in this cohort and ethnic differences were seen. There may be a role for preoperative supplementation in these at-risk ethnic groups.

Investigating major trauma in Maori youth at Te Whatu Ora Counties Manukau.

BACKGROUND: The Ninth Perioperative Mortality Review Committee (POMRC) report found the likelihood of death was over three times higher in Maori youth compared to non-Maori (age: 15-18 years) in the 30-days following major trauma. The aim of our study is to investigate variations in care provided to Maori youth presenting to Te Whatu Ora Counties Manukau (TWO-CM) with major trauma, to inform policies and improve care. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study of 15-18-year-olds admitted to Middlemore Hospital from January 2018 to December 2021 following major trauma (Injury Severity Score (ISS) >12 or with (ISS) <12 who died). Data were obtained from the New Zealand Trauma Registry (NZTR). Six key performance indicators were studied against hospital guidelines/international consensus: Deaths, Cause-of-death, trauma call, RedBlanket activations, time-to-computed tomography (CT), and time-to-operating theatre (OT). RESULTS: Of 77 patients, five deaths occurred, four non-Maori, and one Maori (P = 0.645). Five trauma calls were not activated (P = 0.642). There was no statistically significant difference for both median time to CT (P = 0.917) and time to CT for patients with GCS >13 (P = 0.778) between Maori and non-Maori. Five patients did not meet guidelines for time-to-OT (three non-Maori and two Maori) (P = 0.377). CONCLUSION: No statistically significant variations in care were present for Maori youth presenting with major trauma, these findings did not match the national trend.

The effectiveness of venous thromboembolism prophylaxis interventions in trauma patients: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a major complication of trauma. Currently, there are few studies summarising the evidence for prophylaxis in trauma settings. This review provides evidence for the use of VTE prophylactic interventions in trauma patients to produce evidence-based guidelines. METHODS: A PRISMA-compliant review was conducted from Sep 2021 to June 2023, using Embase, Medline and Google Scholar. The inclusion criteria were: randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) in English published after 2000 of adult trauma patients comparing VTE prophylaxis interventions, with a sample size higher than 20. The network analysis was conducted using RStudio. The results of the pairwise comparisons were presented in the form of a league table. The quality of evidence and heterogeneity sensitivity were assessed. The primary outcome focused on venous thromboembolism (VTE), and examined deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolism (PE) as separate entities. The secondary outcomes included assessments of bleeding and mortality. PROSPERO registration: CRD42021266393. RESULTS: Of the 7,948 search results, 23 studies with a total of 21,312 participants fulfilled screening criteria, which included orthopaedic, spine, solid organ, brain, spinal cord, and multi-region trauma. Of the eight papers comparing chemical prophylaxis medications in patients with hip or lower limb injuries, fondaparinux and enoxaparin were found to be significantly superior to placebo in respect of prevention of DVT, with no increased risk of bleeding. Regarding mechanical prophylaxis, meta-analysis of two studies of inferior vena cava filters failed to provide significant benefits to major trauma patients. CONCLUSION: Enoxaparin and fondaparinux are safe and effective options for VTE prevention in trauma patients, with fondaparinux being a cheaper and easier administration option between the two. Inconclusive results were found in mechanical prophylaxis, requiring more larger-scale RCTs.

Quality Performance Indicators for the Surgical Management of Oesophageal Cancer: A Systematic Literature Review.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this systematic review was to identify pre-existing quality performance indicators (QPIs) for the surgical management of oesophageal cancer (OC). These QPIs can be used to objectively measure and compare the performance of individual units and capture key elements of patient care to improve patient outcomes. METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Scopus and Embase was conducted. Articles reporting on the quality of healthcare in relation to oesophageal neoplasm or cancer and the surgical treatment of OC available until the 1st of March 2022 were included. RESULTS: The final list of articles included retrospective reviews (n = 13), prospective reviews (n = 8), expert guidelines (n = 1) and consensus (n = 1). The final list of QPIs was categorized as process, outcome or structural measures. Process measures included multidisciplinary involvement, availability of multimodality diagnostic and treatment pathways and surgical metrics. Outcome measures included reoperation and readmission rates, the achievement of RO resection and length of hospital stay. Structural measures include multidisciplinary meetings. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review summarizes QPIs for the surgical treatment of OC. The data will serve as an introduction to establishing a quality initiative project for OC resections.

Does the National Bariatric Prioritization Tool predict health outcomes?

BACKGROUND: The National Bariatric Prioritization Tool (NBPT), developed in Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ), has not been validated using real patient data. The aim was to determine the predictive validity of the NBPT on health outcomes. METHODS: An observational study was undertaken of consecutive patients undergoing elective bariatric surgery at Middlemore Hospital using the NBPT from December 2014 to December 2016. The primary outcome was the correlation between prioritization score and percentage total weight loss (%TWL) at 18 months follow-up, with secondary outcomes being correlation with change in HbA1c, lipids, resolution of OSA, resolution of hypertension, and reduction in arthritis medications. Equity of access was measured by the relationship to age group, gender and ethnicity. RESULTS: There were 294 patients included. There was no correlation between %TWL and prioritization score (correlation -0.09, P = 0.14). The benefit score correlated with %TWL (correlation 0.25, P < 0.0001). There were correlations between prioritization score and HbA1c reduction (correlation 0.28, P < 0.0001), resolution of OSA (correlation 0.20, P < 0.001) and resolution of hypertension (correlation 0.20, P < 0.001). There was a significant difference in prioritization score based on ethnicity, with Maori and Pasifika scoring higher than New Zealand European (P = 0.0023). CONCLUSIONS: While the NBPT does not correlate with %TWL, it may have predictive validity through correlations with improvement of comorbidities such as diabetes, OSA and hypertension. Given higher rates of obesity and comorbidities in Maori and Pasifika, the higher scores may suggest the tool may be used to achieve equity of access. Further modifications should be considered to optimize outcomes.

Consensus-defined sarcopenia predicts adverse outcomes after elective abdominal surgery: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia refers to the progressive age- or pathology-associated loss of skeletal muscle. When measured radiologically as reduced muscle mass, sarcopenia has been shown to independently predict morbidity and mortality after elective abdominal surgery. However, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) recently updated their sarcopenia definition, emphasizing both low muscle 'strength' and 'mass'. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the prognostic impact of this updated consensus definition of sarcopenia after elective abdominal surgery. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were systematically searched for studies comparing prognostic outcomes between sarcopenic versus non-sarcopenic adults after elective abdominal surgery from inception to 15 June 2022. The primary outcomes were postoperative morbidity and mortality. Sensitivity analyses adjusting for confounding patient factors were also performed. Methodological quality assessment of studies was performed independently by two authors using the QUality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. RESULTS: Twenty articles with 5421 patients (1059 sarcopenic and 4362 non-sarcopenic) were included. Sarcopenic patients were at significantly greater risk of incurring postoperative complications, despite adjusted multivariate analysis (adjusted OR 1.56, 95 per cent c.i. 1.39 to 1.76). Sarcopenic patients also had significantly higher rates of in-hospital (OR 7.62, 95 per cent c.i. 2.86 to 20.34), 30-day (OR 3.84, 95 per cent c.i. 1.27 to 11.64), and 90-day (OR 3.73, 95 per cent c.i. 1.19 to 11.70) mortality. Sarcopenia was an independent risk factor for poorer overall survival in multivariate Cox regression analysis (adjusted HR 1.28, 95 per cent c.i. 1.13 to 1.44). CONCLUSION: Consensus-defined sarcopenia provides important prognostic information after elective abdominal surgery and can be appropriately measured in the preoperative setting. Development of targeted exercise-based interventions that minimize sarcopenia may improve outcomes for patients who are undergoing elective abdominal surgery.

Weekend effect in emergency laparotomy: a propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND: The 'weekend effect' is the term given to the observed discrepancy regarding patient care and outcomes on weekends compared to weekdays. This study aimed to determine whether the weekend effect exists within Aotearoa New Zealand (AoNZ) for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy (EL), given recent advances in management of EL patients. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted across five hospitals, comparing the outcomes of weekend and weekday acute EL. A propensity-score matched analysis was used to remove potential confounding patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of the 487 patients included, 132 received EL over the weekend. There was no statistically significant difference between patients undergoing EL over the weekend compared to weekdays. Mortality rates were comparable between the weekday and weekend cohorts (P = 0.464). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that modern perioperative care practice in New Zealand obviates the 'weekend' effect.

Development of the national bariatric prioritization tool in Aotearoa New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is a proven effective method of reducing obesity and reversing or preventing obesity-related comorbidities. The aim of this study is to describe the development of a tool to assist with the prioritization of patients with obesity for bariatric surgery. The tool would meet the criteria for being evidence-based, fair, implementable and transparent. METHODS: The development of the tool involved a validated step-by-step process based on the consensus of clinical judgement of the New Zealand Ministry of Health working party. The process involved elicitation of criteria, clinical ranking of vignettes and creation of weightings using the 1000Minds® tool. The concurrent validity was tested by comparing tool rankings of vignettes to clinical judgement rankings. RESULTS: Four major criteria (impact on life, likelihood of achieving maximum benefit with respect to control of diabetes, duration of benefit and surgical risk) are used to characterize the need and potential to benefit. The impact on life criterion has the largest weighting (up to 44.3%). There was good concurrent validity with a correlation coefficient r = 0.67. CONCLUSION: The tool as presented is evidence-based, transparent and internally valid. The next step is to assess the predictive validity of the tool using real patient data to evaluate the effectiveness of the tool and determine what modifications may be required.

The length of hospital stay following bariatric surgery in Australia: the impact of patient, procedure, system and surgeon.

BACKGROUND: The length of a patient's stay (LOS) in a hospital is one metric used to compare the quality of care, as a longer LOS may flag higher complication rates or less efficient processes. A meaningful comparison of LOS can only occur if the expected average length of stay (ALOS) is defined first. This study aimed to define the expected ALOS of primary and conversion bariatric surgery in Australia and to quantify the effect of patient, procedure, system, and surgeon factors on ALOS. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study of prospectively maintained data from the Bariatric Surgery Registry of 63 604 bariatric procedures performed in Australia. The primary outcome measure was the expected ALOS for primary and conversion bariatric procedures. The secondary outcome measures quantified the change in ALOS for bariatric surgery resulting from patient, procedure, hospital, and surgeon factors. RESULTS: Uncomplicated primary bariatric surgery had an ALOS (SD) of 2.30 (1.31) days, whereas conversion procedures had an ALOS (SD) of 2.71 (2.75) days yielding a mean difference (SEM) in ALOS of 0.41 (0.05) days, P < 0.001. The occurrence of any defined adverse event extended the ALOS of primary and conversion procedures by 1.14 days (CI 95% 1.04-1.25), P < 0.001 and 2.33 days (CI 95% 1.54-3.11), P < 0.001, respectively. Older age, diabetes, rural home address, surgeon operating volume and hospital case volume increased the ALOS following bariatric surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings have defined Australia's expected ALOS following bariatric surgery. Increased patient age, diabetes, rural living, procedural complications and surgeon and hospital case volume exerted a small but significant increase in ALOS. STUDY TYPE: Retrospective observational study of prospectively collected data.

Bariatric Surgery Efficiency, Safety and Health Outcomes in Government Versus Privately Funded Hospitals.

PURPOSE: This study aims to determine if the hospital efficiency, safety and health outcomes are equal in patients who receive bariatric surgery in government-funded hospitals (GFH) versus privately funded hospitals (PFH). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study of prospectively maintained data from the Australia and New Zealand Bariatric Surgery Registry of 14,862 procedures (2134 GFH and 12,728 PFH) from 33 hospitals (8 GFH and 25 PFH) performed in Victoria, Australia, between January 1st, 2015, and December 31st, 2020. Outcome measures included the difference in efficacy (weight loss, diabetes remission), safety (defined adverse event and complications) and efficiency (hospital length of stay) between the two health systems. RESULTS: GFH treated a higher risk patient group who were older by a mean (SD) 2.4 years (0.27), P < 0.001; had a mean 9.0 kg (0.6) greater weight at time of surgery, P < 0.001; and a higher prevalence of diabetes at day of surgery OR = 2.57 (CI95%2.29-2.89), P < 0.001. Despite these baseline differences, both GFH and PFH yielded near identical remission of diabetes which was stable up to 4 years post-operatively (57%). There was no statistically significant difference in defined adverse events between the GFH and PFH (OR = 1.24 (CI95% 0.93-1.67), P = 0.14). Both healthcare settings demonstrated that similar covariates affect length of stay (LOS) (diabetes, conversion bariatric procedures and defined adverse event); however, these covariates had a greater effect on LOS in GFH compared to PFH. CONCLUSIONS: Bariatric surgery performed in GFH and PFH yields comparable health outcomes (metabolic and weight loss) and safety. There was a small but statistically significant increased LOS following bariatric surgery in GFH.