[Quality of documentation of intraoperative and postoperative complications : improvement of documentation for a nationwide quality assurance program and comparison with routine data]. / Dokumentationsqualität intra- und postoperativer Komplikationen : Verbesserung der Dokumentation für die verpflichtende Qualitätssicherung und Vergleich mit DRG-Routinedaten.

INTRODUCTION: Complications after cholecystectomy are continuously documented in a nationwide database in Germany. Recent studies demonstrated a lack of reliability of these data. The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of a control algorithm on documentation quality and the use of routine diagnosis coding as an additional validation instrument. METHODS: Completeness and correctness of the documentation of complications after cholecystectomy was compared over a time interval of 12 months before and after implementation of an algorithm for faster and more accurate documentation. Furthermore, the coding of all diagnoses was screened to identify intraoperative and postoperative complications. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The sensitivity of the documentation for complications improved from 46 % to 70 % (p = 0.05, specificity 98 % in both time intervals). A prolonged time interval of more than 6 weeks between patient discharge and documentation was associated with inferior data quality (incorrect documentation in 1.5 % versus 15 %, p < 0.05). The rate of case documentation within the 6 weeks after hospital discharge was clearly improved after implementation of the control algorithm. Sensitivity and specificity of screening for complications by evaluating routine diagnoses coding were 70 % and 85 %, respectively. The quality of documentation was improved by implementation of a simple memory algorithm.

[Surgical volume. An American perspective]. / Chirurgische Fallzahl. Die amerikanische Perspektive.

Due to an increasing interest in patient safety and quality health care, many studies attempt to show a relationship between procedural volume at the institutional and individual level and patient outcome. Despite the correlation between number of surgeons and institutional volume in major operative procedures such as coronary artery bypass graft, pancreatic resection, and esophagectomy, these parameters are likely to be proxy for individual factors such as experience and structural aspects. In general the relationship between case numbers and results is more convincing in cancer surgery than for cardiovascular procedures, and risk adjustment may play an important role for interpreting results of the various studies. Exact thresholds cannot be determined and thus remain speculative. It appears difficult to implement practical changes based on the observations, because the etiology and causality of the relationship between volume and outcome are still not understood. The simple focus on volume does not apply to measurements of quality but can be a starting point for further studies to identify more specific factors associated with surgical quality.