Skip to main content
Top
Published in: World Journal of Surgery 10/2007

01-10-2007

Accuracy of the Surgeons’ Clinical Prediction of Perioperative Complications Using a Visual Analog Scale

Authors: John C. Woodfield, Ross A. Pettigrew, Lindsay D. Plank, Michael Landmann, Andre M. van Rij

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 10/2007

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The ability to predict who will develop perioperative complications remains difficult because the etiology of adverse events is multifactorial. This study examines the preoperative and postoperative ability of the surgeon to predict complications and assesses the significance of a change in prediction.

Methods

This was a prospective study of 1013 patients. The surgeon assessed the risk of a major complication on a 100-mm visual analog scale (VAS) immediately before and after surgery. When the VAS score was changed, the surgeon was asked to document why. Patients were assessed up to 30 days postoperatively.

Results

Surgeons made a meaningful preoperative prediction of major complications (median score = 27mm vs. 19mm, p < 0.01), with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.74 for mortality, 0.67 for major complications, and 0.63 for all complications. A change in the VAS score postoperatively was due to technical reasons in 74% of stated cases. An increased VAS score identified significantly more complications, but the improvement in the discrimination was small. When included in a multivariate model for predicting postoperative complications, the surgeon’s VAS score functioned as an independent predictive variable and improved the predictive ability, goodness of fit, and discrimination of the model.

Conclusions

Clinical assessment of risk by the surgeon using a VAS score independently improves the prediction of perioperative complications. Including the unique contribution of the surgeon’s clinical assessment should be considered in models designed to predict the risk of surgery.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Adab P, Rouse AM, Mohammed MA, et al. (2002) Performance league tables: the NHS deserves better. Br Med J 324:95–98CrossRef Adab P, Rouse AM, Mohammed MA, et al. (2002) Performance league tables: the NHS deserves better. Br Med J 324:95–98CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Pettigrew RA, Hill GL (1986) Indicators of surgical risk and clinical judgement. Br J Surg 73:47–51PubMedCrossRef Pettigrew RA, Hill GL (1986) Indicators of surgical risk and clinical judgement. Br J Surg 73:47–51PubMedCrossRef
4.
go back to reference Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M (1991) POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit. Br J Surg 78:356–369CrossRef Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M (1991) POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit. Br J Surg 78:356–369CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Knaus WA (2002) APACHE 1978–2001: The development of a quality assurance system based on prognosis: Milestones and personal reflections. Arch Surg 137:37–42PubMedCrossRef Knaus WA (2002) APACHE 1978–2001: The development of a quality assurance system based on prognosis: Milestones and personal reflections. Arch Surg 137:37–42PubMedCrossRef
6.
go back to reference Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, et al. (1985) APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 13:818–829PubMedCrossRef Knaus WA, Draper EA, Wagner DP, et al. (1985) APACHE II: a severity of disease classification system. Crit Care Med 13:818–829PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Sutton R, Bann S, Brooks M, et al. (2002) Surgical Risk Scale as an improved tool for risk-adjusted analysis in comparative surgical audit. Br J Surg 89(6):763–768PubMedCrossRef Sutton R, Bann S, Brooks M, et al. (2002) Surgical Risk Scale as an improved tool for risk-adjusted analysis in comparative surgical audit. Br J Surg 89(6):763–768PubMedCrossRef
8.
go back to reference Pillai SB, van Rij AM, Williams S, et al. (1999) Complexity and risk adjusted models for measuring surgical outcome. Br J Surg 86:1567–1572PubMedCrossRef Pillai SB, van Rij AM, Williams S, et al. (1999) Complexity and risk adjusted models for measuring surgical outcome. Br J Surg 86:1567–1572PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Daley J, Khuri SF, Henderson W, et al. (1997) Risk adjustment of the postoperative morbidity rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg 185(4):328–340PubMed Daley J, Khuri SF, Henderson W, et al. (1997) Risk adjustment of the postoperative morbidity rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg 185(4):328–340PubMed
10.
go back to reference Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. (1997) Risk adjustment of the postoperative mortality rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg 185:315–327PubMed Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. (1997) Risk adjustment of the postoperative mortality rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg 185:315–327PubMed
11.
go back to reference Tekkis PP, Poloniecki JD, Thompson MR, et al. (2002) ACPGBI colorectal cancer study 2002. Part B: Risk adjusted outcomes. The ACPGBI colorectal cancer model. London, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland Tekkis PP, Poloniecki JD, Thompson MR, et al. (2002) ACPGBI colorectal cancer study 2002. Part B: Risk adjusted outcomes. The ACPGBI colorectal cancer model. London, Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland
12.
go back to reference Klotz HP, Candinas D, Platz A, et al. (1996) Preoperative risk assessment in elective general surgery. Br J Surg 83:1788–1791PubMedCrossRef Klotz HP, Candinas D, Platz A, et al. (1996) Preoperative risk assessment in elective general surgery. Br J Surg 83:1788–1791PubMedCrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ondrula DP, Nelson RL, Prasad ML, et al. (1992) Multifactorial Index of Preoperative Risk Factors in colon resections. Dis Colon Rectum 35:117–122PubMedCrossRef Ondrula DP, Nelson RL, Prasad ML, et al. (1992) Multifactorial Index of Preoperative Risk Factors in colon resections. Dis Colon Rectum 35:117–122PubMedCrossRef
14.
go back to reference Al-Ruzzeh SI, Asimakopoulos G, Ambler G, et al. (2003) Validation of four different risk stratification systems in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: a UK multicentre analysis of 2223 patients. Heart 89(4):432–435PubMedCrossRef Al-Ruzzeh SI, Asimakopoulos G, Ambler G, et al. (2003) Validation of four different risk stratification systems in patients undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery: a UK multicentre analysis of 2223 patients. Heart 89(4):432–435PubMedCrossRef
15.
go back to reference Jones DR, Copeland GP, de Cossart L (1992) Comparison of POSSUM with APACHE II for prediction of outcome from a surgical high dependency unit. Br J Surg 79:1293–1296PubMedCrossRef Jones DR, Copeland GP, de Cossart L (1992) Comparison of POSSUM with APACHE II for prediction of outcome from a surgical high dependency unit. Br J Surg 79:1293–1296PubMedCrossRef
16.
go back to reference Martin IG, Kempthorne AE, Connolly A (2002) Assessing patients for general surgical procedures: how well can we predict outcomes? ANZ J Surg 72(Suppl 1):A24 Martin IG, Kempthorne AE, Connolly A (2002) Assessing patients for general surgical procedures: how well can we predict outcomes? ANZ J Surg 72(Suppl 1):A24
17.
go back to reference Pettigrew RA, Burns HJG, Carter DC (1987) Evaluating surgical risk: the importance of technical factors in determining outcome. Br J Surg 74:791–794PubMedCrossRef Pettigrew RA, Burns HJG, Carter DC (1987) Evaluating surgical risk: the importance of technical factors in determining outcome. Br J Surg 74:791–794PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Ouriel K, Geary K, Green RM, et al. (1990) Factors determining survival after ruptured aortic aneurysm: The hospital, the surgeon, and the patient. J Vasc Surg 11:493–496PubMedCrossRef Ouriel K, Geary K, Green RM, et al. (1990) Factors determining survival after ruptured aortic aneurysm: The hospital, the surgeon, and the patient. J Vasc Surg 11:493–496PubMedCrossRef
20.
go back to reference Bancewicz J (1990) Cancer of the oesophagus. Find a good surgeon. Br J Surg 300:3–4 Bancewicz J (1990) Cancer of the oesophagus. Find a good surgeon. Br J Surg 300:3–4
21.
go back to reference Callahan MA, Christos PJ, Gold HT, et al. (2003) Influence of surgical subspecialty training on in-hospital mortality for colectomy patients. Ann Surg 238(4):629–639PubMed Callahan MA, Christos PJ, Gold HT, et al. (2003) Influence of surgical subspecialty training on in-hospital mortality for colectomy patients. Ann Surg 238(4):629–639PubMed
22.
go back to reference Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR (2002) Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med 137:511–520PubMed Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR (2002) Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med 137:511–520PubMed
23.
go back to reference Ingemar I (2003) The volume-outcome relationship in cancer surgery: a hard sell. Ann Surg 238(6):777–781CrossRef Ingemar I (2003) The volume-outcome relationship in cancer surgery: a hard sell. Ann Surg 238(6):777–781CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Woodfield JC, van Rij AM, Pettigrew RA, et al. (2003) A comparison of the prophylactic efficacy of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime in abdominal surgery. Am J Surg 185:45–49PubMedCrossRef Woodfield JC, van Rij AM, Pettigrew RA, et al. (2003) A comparison of the prophylactic efficacy of ceftriaxone and cefotaxime in abdominal surgery. Am J Surg 185:45–49PubMedCrossRef
25.
go back to reference Department of Surgery Clinical Audit Research Unit (1996) The Otago Audit System: Codes for Surgical Audit (General/Vascular) 1996 Revision. Dunedin, New Zealand, University of Otago Department of Surgery Clinical Audit Research Unit (1996) The Otago Audit System: Codes for Surgical Audit (General/Vascular) 1996 Revision. Dunedin, New Zealand, University of Otago
26.
go back to reference Arvidsson S, Ouchterlony J, Sjostedt L, et al. (1996) Predicting postoperative adverse events. Clinical efficiency of four general classification systems. The project perioperative risk. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 40:783–791PubMedCrossRef Arvidsson S, Ouchterlony J, Sjostedt L, et al. (1996) Predicting postoperative adverse events. Clinical efficiency of four general classification systems. The project perioperative risk. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 40:783–791PubMedCrossRef
27.
go back to reference Hartley MN, Sagar PM (1994) The surgeons gut feeling as a predictor of postoperative outcome. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 76(Suppl 6):277–278PubMed Hartley MN, Sagar PM (1994) The surgeons gut feeling as a predictor of postoperative outcome. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 76(Suppl 6):277–278PubMed
28.
go back to reference Markus PM, Martell I, Leister O, et al. (2005) Predicting postoperative morbidity by clinical assessment. Br J Surg 92:101–106PubMedCrossRef Markus PM, Martell I, Leister O, et al. (2005) Predicting postoperative morbidity by clinical assessment. Br J Surg 92:101–106PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Accuracy of the Surgeons’ Clinical Prediction of Perioperative Complications Using a Visual Analog Scale
Authors
John C. Woodfield
Ross A. Pettigrew
Lindsay D. Plank
Michael Landmann
Andre M. van Rij
Publication date
01-10-2007
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
World Journal of Surgery / Issue 10/2007
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-007-9178-0

Other articles of this Issue 10/2007

World Journal of Surgery 10/2007 Go to the issue