Variation in surgery postponement rates in the NHS in England.

IF 8.6 1区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Emma McCone, Chris Snowden, Michael Swart, Tim W R Briggs, William K Gray
{"title":"Variation in surgery postponement rates in the NHS in England.","authors":"Emma McCone, Chris Snowden, Michael Swart, Tim W R Briggs, William K Gray","doi":"10.1093/bjs/znae280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Postponement of surgery at preoperative assessment in the days or weeks before the patient is admitted for surgery, as distinct from cancellation on the planned day of surgery, can be devastating for patients and an inefficient use of finite resources. However, postponements are often poorly recorded. The primary aim of this pilot study was to investigate elective surgical postponement rates during or after preoperative assessment across England, and the reasons for postponement for patients on an elective surgical pathway.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis of clinical audit data from 16 National Health Service (NHS) trusts in England was undertaken. Data were collected during a two-week period in March 2024 on all postponements within a service. The primary outcome of interest was the postponement rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Some 8000 case notes were reviewed. There were 583 (7.3%) postponements. Postponement rates across trusts varied from 31.9% to 1.0%. Significantly shorter time from referral to preoperative assessment was observed for day-case patients, urgent patients, patients without early screening and patients without a 'to come in' date in place. Of the 342 routine patients, 293 (85.7%) had postponements for medical rather than pathways or process reasons. Half of all routine patients waited over 94 days and a quarter of patients waited 198 days from being added to a patient tracking list to preoperative assessment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Minimizing postponements and improving preoperative assessment efficiency should be part of wider initiatives to streamline perioperative pathways.</p>","PeriodicalId":136,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Surgery","volume":"111 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjs/znae280","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Postponement of surgery at preoperative assessment in the days or weeks before the patient is admitted for surgery, as distinct from cancellation on the planned day of surgery, can be devastating for patients and an inefficient use of finite resources. However, postponements are often poorly recorded. The primary aim of this pilot study was to investigate elective surgical postponement rates during or after preoperative assessment across England, and the reasons for postponement for patients on an elective surgical pathway.

Methods: A retrospective analysis of clinical audit data from 16 National Health Service (NHS) trusts in England was undertaken. Data were collected during a two-week period in March 2024 on all postponements within a service. The primary outcome of interest was the postponement rate.

Results: Some 8000 case notes were reviewed. There were 583 (7.3%) postponements. Postponement rates across trusts varied from 31.9% to 1.0%. Significantly shorter time from referral to preoperative assessment was observed for day-case patients, urgent patients, patients without early screening and patients without a 'to come in' date in place. Of the 342 routine patients, 293 (85.7%) had postponements for medical rather than pathways or process reasons. Half of all routine patients waited over 94 days and a quarter of patients waited 198 days from being added to a patient tracking list to preoperative assessment.

Conclusions: Minimizing postponements and improving preoperative assessment efficiency should be part of wider initiatives to streamline perioperative pathways.

英格兰国家医疗服务体系中手术推迟率的差异。
导言:在患者入院接受手术前几天或几周进行术前评估时,推迟手术(有别于在计划手术当天取消手术)可能会对患者造成严重影响,也会使有限的资源得不到有效利用。然而,推迟手术的记录往往很少。这项试点研究的主要目的是调查全英格兰在术前评估期间或之后的择期手术推迟率,以及择期手术患者推迟手术的原因:对英格兰 16 家国民健康服务(NHS)托管机构的临床审计数据进行了回顾性分析。数据收集时间为 2024 年 3 月的两周内,涉及服务范围内的所有延期情况。研究的主要结果是推迟率:对大约 8000 份病例记录进行了审查。结果:共审查了约 8000 份病例记录,其中有 583 例(7.3%)延期。各信托机构的推迟率从 31.9% 到 1.0% 不等。据观察,日间病例患者、急诊患者、未进行早期筛查的患者和未设定 "来院 "日期的患者从转诊到术前评估的时间明显较短。在 342 名常规患者中,有 293 人(85.7%)因医疗原因而非路径或流程原因推迟了手术时间。半数常规患者等待时间超过 94 天,四分之一的患者从加入患者追踪名单到术前评估等待了 198 天:结论:尽量减少延期和提高术前评估效率应成为简化围手术期路径的广泛举措的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
12.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
1102
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Surgery (BJS), incorporating the European Journal of Surgery, stands as Europe's leading peer-reviewed surgical journal. It serves as an invaluable platform for presenting high-quality clinical and laboratory-based research across a wide range of surgical topics. In addition to providing a comprehensive coverage of traditional surgical practices, BJS also showcases emerging areas in the field, such as minimally invasive therapy and interventional radiology. While the journal appeals to general surgeons, it also holds relevance for specialty surgeons and professionals working in closely related fields. By presenting cutting-edge research and advancements, BJS aims to revolutionize the way surgical knowledge is shared and contribute to the ongoing progress of the surgical community.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信