Impact of developing a multidisciplinary coded dataset standard on administrative data accuracy for septoplasty, septorhinoplasty and nasal trauma surgery.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to develop a multidisciplinary coded dataset standard for nasal surgery and to assess its impact on data accuracy. METHOD: An audit of 528 patients undergoing septal and/or inferior turbinate surgery, rhinoplasty and/or septorhinoplasty, and nasal fracture surgery was undertaken. RESULTS: A total of 200 septoplasties, 109 septorhinoplasties, 57 complex septorhinoplasties and 116 nasal fractures were analysed. There were 76 (14.4 per cent) changes to the primary diagnosis. Septorhinoplasties were the most commonly amended procedures. The overall audit-related income change for nasal surgery was £8.78 per patient. Use of a multidisciplinary coded dataset standard revealed that nasal diagnoses were under-coded; a significant proportion of patients received more precise diagnoses following the audit. There was also significant under-coding of both morbidities and revision surgery. CONCLUSION: The multidisciplinary coded dataset standard approach can improve the accuracy of both data capture and information flow, and, thus, ultimately create a more reliable dataset for use outcomes and health planning.

A stratified analysis of the perioperative outcome of 17623 patients undergoing major head and neck cancer surgery in England over 10 years: Towards an Informatics-based Outcomes Surveillance Framework.

OBJECTIVES: To perform a national analysis of the perioperative outcome of major head and neck cancer surgery to develop a stratification strategy and outcomes assessment framework using hospital administrative data. DESIGN: A Hospital Episode Statistics N = near-all analysis. SETTINGS: The English National Health Service. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Local audit data were used to assess and triangulate the quality of the administrative dataset. Within the national dataset, cancer sites, morbidities, social deprivation, treatment, complications, and in-hospital mortality were recorded. RESULTS: Within local audit datasets, the accuracy of assigning newly-derived Cancer Site Strata and Resection Strata were 92.3% and 94.2%, respectively. Accuracy of morbidities assignment was 97%. Within the national dataset, we identified 17 623 major head and neck cancer resections between 2002 and 2012. There were 12 413 males and mean age at surgery was 63 ± 12 years. The commonest cancer site strata were oral cavity (42%) and larynx-hypopharynx (32%). The commonest resection site was the larynx (n = 4217), and 13 211 and 11 841 patients had neck dissection and flap-based reconstruction, respectively. There were prognostically significant baseline differences between patients with oromandibular and pharyngolaryngeal malignancy. Patients with pharyngolaryngeal malignancies had a greater burden of morbidities, lower socio-economic status, fewer primary resections, and a sixfold increased risk of undergoing their major resection during an emergency hospital admission. Mean length of stay was 25 days and each complication linearly increased it by 9.6 days. There were 609 (3.5%) in-hospital deaths and a basket of seven medical and three surgical complications significantly increased the risk of in-hospital death. At least one potentially lethal complication occurred in 26% of patients. The risk of in-hospital death in a patient with no potentially lethal complication was 1.1% and this increased to 6% with one potentially lethal complication, and to 15.1% if two potentially lethal complications occurred in one patient. Complex oral-pharyngeal resections and pharyngolaryngectomies had the highest risks of complications and mortality. CONCLUSION: Mortality following head and neck cancer surgery shows variation across different resection strata. We propose an Informatics-based Framework for Outcomes Surveillance (IFOS) in Head and Neck Surgery for perpetual quality assurance, using the local hospital coding data or its collated destination, the national administrative dataset.

A Study of Clinical Coding Accuracy in Surgery: Implications for the Use of Administrative Big Data for Outcomes Management.

BACKGROUND: Clinical coding is the translation of clinical activity into a coded language. Coded data drive hospital reimbursement and are used for audit and research, and benchmarking and outcomes management purposes. METHODS: We undertook a 2-center audit of coding accuracy across surgery. Clinician-auditor multidisciplinary teams reviewed the coding of 30,127 patients and assessed accuracy at primary and secondary diagnosis and procedure levels, morbidity level, complications assignment, and financial variance. Postaudit data of a randomly selected sample of 400 cases were reaudited by an independent team. RESULTS: At least 1 coding change occurred in 15,402 patients (51%). There were 3911 (13%) and 3620 (12%) changes to primary diagnoses and procedures, respectively. In 5183 (17%) patients, the Health Resource Grouping changed, resulting in income variance of £3,974,544 (+6.2%). The morbidity level changed in 2116 (7%) patients (P < 0.001). The number of assigned complications rose from 2597 (8.6%) to 2979 (9.9%) (P < 0.001). Reaudit resulted in further primary diagnosis and procedure changes in 8.7% and 4.8% of patients, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The coded data are a key engine for knowledge-driven health care provision. They are used, increasingly at individual surgeon level, to benchmark performance. Surgical clinical coding is prone to subjectivity, variability, and error (SVE). Having a specialty-by-specialty understanding of the nature and clinical significance of informatics variability and adopting strategies to reduce it, are necessary to allow accurate assumptions and informed decisions to be made concerning the scope and clinical applicability of administrative data in surgical outcomes improvement.

Role of reconstructive surgery in the management of head and neck cancer: a national outcomes analysis of 11,841 reconstructions.

BACKGROUND: The quality of head and neck cancer reconstruction in England is not known. Hospital administrative data provides details of treatment within the English National Health Service and may be used for national outcomes analysis. METHODS: An algorithm for identifying head and neck surgery with flap-based reconstruction from administrative data was constructed and validated against information from three cancer units. The validated algorithm was applied to 2003-2013 national activity. RESULTS: The algorithm was 91% sensitive and over 99% specific. Its application to administrative data identified 11,841 patients and demonstrated an increase of 52% in reconstruction-containing head and neck cancer surgery in the past decade. There were 7776 males and mean treatment age was 62 years. Oral cavity was the commonest primary site (n = 7567; 64%) and 7575 patients (64%) underwent primary surgery. The commonest procedure was floor-of-mouth excision (n = 3614) and 9749 patients had a neck dissection. The most commonly used flap was the radial forearm (n = 4429). Flap failure occurred in 496 (4.2%) patients. It increased the mean length of stay from 22 to 41 days (P < 0.00001), and the odds ratio of in-hospital death to 2.37 [95% confidence interval 1.66-3.38; P < 0.0001]. Lethality of reconstructive failure was not uniform and was highest when a pharyngolaryngeal flap failed. CONCLUSIONS: Reconstructive surgery is central to the multidisciplinary management of head and neck cancer. Its quality directly influences patient morbidity and survival. We recommend that analysis of hospital administrative data should be periodically carried out as part of an over-arching quality assurance programme and, particularly for pharyngolaryngeal reconstructions, surgery should be undertaken in units with the best reconstructive outcomes.

Audit of accuracy of clinical coding in oral surgery.

We aimed to study the accuracy of clinical coding within oral surgery and to identify ways in which it can be improved. We undertook did a multidisciplinary audit of a sample of 646 day case patients who had had oral surgery procedures between 2011 and 2012. We compared the codes given with their case notes and amended any discrepancies. The accuracy of coding was assessed for primary and secondary diagnoses and procedures, and for health resource groupings (HRGs). The financial impact of coding Subjectivity, Variability and Error (SVE) was assessed by reference to national tariffs. The audit resulted in 122 (19%) changes to primary diagnoses. The codes for primary procedures changed in 224 (35%) cases; 310 (48%) morbidities and complications had been missed, and 266 (41%) secondary procedures had been missed or were incorrect. This led to at least one change of coding in 496 (77%) patients, and to the HRG changes in 348 (54%) patients. The financial impact of this was £114 in lost revenue per patient. There is a high incidence of coding errors in oral surgery because of the large number of day cases, a lack of awareness by clinicians of coding issues, and because clinical coders are not always familiar with the large number of highly specialised abbreviations used. Accuracy of coding can be improved through the use of a well-designed proforma, and standards can be maintained by the use of an ongoing data quality assurance programme.

An audit of the nature and impact of clinical coding subjectivity variability and error in otolaryngology.

OBJECTIVES: To audit the accuracy of clinical coding in otolaryngology, assess the effectiveness of previously implemented interventions, and determine ways in which it can be further improved. DESIGN: Prospective clinician-auditor multidisciplinary audit of clinical coding accuracy. PARTICIPANTS: Elective and emergency ENT admissions and day-case activity. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Concordance between initial coding and the clinician-auditor multi-disciplinary teams (MDT) coding in respect of primary and secondary diagnoses and procedures, health resource groupings health resource groupings (HRGs) and tariffs. RESULTS: The audit of 3131 randomly selected otolaryngology patients between 2010 and 2012 resulted in 420 instances of change to the primary diagnosis (13%) and 417 changes to the primary procedure (13%). In 1420 cases (44%), there was at least one change to the initial coding and 514 (16%) health resource groupings changed. There was an income variance of £343,169 or £109.46 per patient. The highest rates of health resource groupings change were observed in head and neck surgery and in particular skull-based surgery, laryngology and within that tracheostomy, and emergency admissions, and specially, epistaxis management. A randomly selected sample of 235 patients from the audit were subjected to a second audit by a second clinician-auditor multi-disciplinary team. There were 12 further health resource groupings changes (5%) and at least one further coding change occurred in 57 patients (24%). These changes were significantly lower than those observed in the pre-audit sample, but were also significantly greater than zero. Asking surgeons to 'code in theatre' and applying these codes without further quality assurance to activity resulted in an health resource groupings error rate of 45%. The full audit sample was regrouped under health resource groupings 3.5 and was compared with a previous audit of 1250 patients performed between 2007 and 2008. This comparison showed a reduction in the baseline rate of health resource groupings change from 16% during the first audit cycle to 9% in the current audit cycle (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Otolaryngology coding is complex and susceptible to subjectivity, variability and error. Coding variability can be improved, but not eliminated through regular education supported by an audit programme.

A national analysis of the outcome of major head and neck cancer surgery: implications for surgeon-level data publication.

OBJECTIVES: To undertake a national outcomes analysis following major head and neck cancer surgery in order to identify risk factors for complications and in-hospital mortality, as well as areas whose closer examination and formal benchmarking in the context of local and national quality assurance audits may lead to improved results for this condition. DESIGN: An analysis using Hospital Episode Statistics data. SETTINGS: All units undertaking major head and neck cancer surgery in England. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Cancer sites, co-morbidities, social deprivation, surgical and non-surgical treatments, complications, and in-hospital mortality were recorded. Regression analysis was used for casemix adjustment and for identifying independent predictors of complications and mortality. Funnel plots were used for data visualisation. RESULTS: We identified 10,589 major head and neck cancer operations performed in England between 2006 and 2011. There were 7312 males, and mean age at surgery was 63 ± 13 years. Oral cavity (42%) and the larynx (28%) were the commonest cancer sites. At least one complication occurred in 33.1% of patients, and there were 322 (3.05%) in-hospital deaths. Variables associated with in-hospital mortality were trust volume, age, co-morbidities, performing emergency major surgery and performing a tracheostomy or reconstructive surgery. Occurrence of major medical complications including pulmonary infections (7%), major acute cardiovascular events (4.7%) and acute renal failure (0.6%) also increased mortality risk. The analysis identified units that were outside of crude and risk-adjusted 99.8% limits of confidence for complications and mortality. CONCLUSION: Mortality following head and neck cancer surgery shows significant national variation and is associated with fixed risk factors like age and co-morbidities, but also with modifiable risk factors like performing major surgery during an emergency admission, tracheostomy, reconstructive surgery and medical complications. We propose that the quality of tracheostomy care, reconstructive surgery, emergency major surgery rate, and occurrence and treatment of major medical complications should be closely examined and formally benchmarked as part of loco-regional and national quality improvement audits.