Validation of Complications Selected by Consensus to Evaluate the Acute Phase of Adult Trauma Care: A Multicenter Cohort Study. Issue 6 (December 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Moore, Lynne; Lauzier, François; Stelfox, Henry Thomas; Kortbeek, John; Simons, Richard; Bourgeois, Gilles; Clément, Julien; Turgeon, Alexis F.
• Is Part Of: Annals of surgery. Volume 262:Issue 6(2015:Dec.)
• Publication Date: 2015-12
• Subjects: consensus -- hospital complications -- predictive validity -- quality of care -- trauma; Surgery -- Periodicals; 617.005
• DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000000963
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0003-4932

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: Evaluate the predictive validity of complications derived using expert consensus methodology to monitor the quality of trauma care. Secondary objectives were to assess the predictive validity of complications not selected by consensus and identify determinants of complications. Background: A list of complications to monitor the quality of trauma care has recently been derived using Delphi consensus methodology. However, the predictive validity of consensus complications has not yet been demonstrated. Methods: We conducted a multicenter cohort study of adults admitted to the 57 adult trauma centers of a Canadian integrated trauma system (2007–2012; n = 84, 216). Multiple generalized linear models were used to assess the influence of complications on mortality and acute care length of stay (LOS) and to identify determinants of consensus complications. Results: The presence of at least 1 consensus complication was associated with a 2.7-fold [95% confidence interval (CI): 2.45–2.90] and 2.2-fold (95% CI: 2.11–2.19) increase in the odds of mortality and mean LOS, respectively. Nonselected complications were associated with no increase in mortality (odds ratio = 0.90, 95% CI: 0.80–1.01) and a 60% increase in LOS (geometric mean ratio = 1.60, 95% CI: 1.57–1.62). Patient-related factors and factors related to treatment explained 66% and 34% of the variation in complication rates, respectively. Conclusions: In addition to the face and content validity ensured by consensus methodology, this study suggests that consensus complications have good predictive validity. Monitoring these complications as part of quality improvement activities would provide an opportunity to improve outcome and resource use for injury admissions.