Search

Careful selection of bariatric patients is critical for successful outcomes. In 1991, the NIH first established patient selection guidelines; however, some surgeons operate on individuals outside of these criteria, i.e., extreme age groups. We developed appropriateness criteria for the spectrum of patient characteristics including age, BMI, and severity of eight obesity-related comorbidities. Candidate criteria were developed using combinations of patient characteristics including BMI: > or =40 kg/m(2), 35-39, 32-34, 30-31, <30; age: 12-18, 19-55, 56-64, 65+ years old; and comorbidities: prediabetes, diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, sleep apnea, venous stasis disease, chronic joint pain, and gastroesophageal reflux (plus severity level). Criteria were formally validated on their appropriateness of whether the benefits of surgery clearly outweighed the risks, by an expert panel using the RAND/UCLA modified Delphi method. Nearly all comorbidity severity criteria for patients with BMI > or =40 kg/m(2) or BMI = 35-39 kg/m(2) in intermediate age groups were found to be appropriate for surgery. In contrast, patients in the extreme age categories were considered appropriate surgical candidates under fewer conditions, primarily the more severe comorbidities, such as diabetes and hypertension. For patients with a BMI of 32-34, only the most severe category of diabetes (Hgb A1c >9, on maximal medical therapy), is an appropriate criterion for those aged 19-64, whereas many mild to moderate severity comorbidity categories are "inappropriate." There is overwhelming agreement among the panelists that the current evidence does not support performing bariatric surgery in lower BMI individuals (BMI <32). This is the first development of appropriateness criteria for bariatric surgery that includes severity categories of comorbidities. Only for the most severe degrees of comorbidities were adolescent and elderly patients deemed appropriate for surgery. Patient selection for bariatric procedures should include consideration of both patient age and comorbidity severity.

Quality indicators will likely be used in comprehensive surgical quality assessment and improvement programs. Quality indicators are the actions equated with good quality of care. As a case example, bariatric surgery quality indicators were developed using evidence in the literature combined with formal expert opinion validation. Qualitative analysis was performed to identify the critical thematic issues surrounding development of these surgical quality indicators. Researchers identified five major thematic categories during the development process. These included feasibility in medical records (availability, ease of abstraction, and cost), the number of indicators developed (optimal number), the lack of evidence in the literature (weight on expert opinion), structural versus process indicators, and linkage to outcomes (need to demonstrate that adherence to indicators is associated with better outcomes). This project, using bariatric surgery as an example, uncovered important issues that need to be addressed when developing quality assessment and quality improvement programs for evaluating surgical quality. As quality indicators will likely be developed and used increasingly, future projects in this regard will benefit from these lessons.

Objectives: Bariatric surgery is one of the most common complex intraabdominal operations, and there are reports of variations in outcome among providers. There is a need to standardize the processes of care in this specialty, and, as an attempt to do so, quality indicators were developed., Methods: Candidate indicators, covering preoperative to follow-up care (5 domains), were developed based on evidence in the literature. Indicators were formally rated as valid by use of the RAND/UCLA Validity and Appropriateness method, which quantitatively assesses the expert judgment of a group using a 9-point scale (1 = not valid; 9 = definitely valid). Fourteen individuals participated in the expert panel, including bariatric surgeons and obesity experts. The method is iterative with 2 rounds of ratings and a group discussion. Indicators with a median rating > or =7 were valid. This method has been shown to have content, construct, and predictive validity., Results: Of 63 candidate indicators, 51 were rated as valid measures of good quality of care covering the spectrum of perioperative care for bariatric surgery. Of the 51 indicators rated as valid (> or =7), all had sufficient "agreement" scores among panelists. Indicators included structural measures (e.g., procedural volume requirements) as well as processes of care (e.g., receipt of preoperative antibiotics, use of clinical pathway)., Conclusions: This is the first formal attempt at development of quality indicators for bariatric surgery. Adherence to the indicators should equate with better quality of care, and their implementation will allow for quantitative assessment of quality of care.

Context The use of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) has been reported to be effective in the treatment of obesity and its related comorbidities. Utilization of inpatient services after RYGB is less well understood. Objective To determine the rates and indications for inpatient hospital use before and after RYGB. Design, Setting, and Participants Retrospective study of Californians receiving RYGB in California hospitals from 1995 to 2004. Main Outcome Measure Hospitalization in the 1 to 3 years after RYGB. Results In California from 1995 to 2004, 60 077 patients underwent RYGB—11 659 in 2004 alone. The rate of hospitalization in the year following RYGB was more than double the rate in the year preceding RYGB (19.3% vs 7.9%, P<.001). Furthermore, in the subset of patients (n = 24 678) with full 3-year follow-up, a mean of 8.4% were admitted a year before RYGB while 20.2% were readmitted in the year after RYGB, 18.4% in the second year after RYGB, and 14.9% in the third year after RYGB. The most common reasons for admission prior to RYGB were obesity-related problems (eg, osteoarthritis, lower extremity cellulitis), and elective operation (eg, hysterectomy), while the most common reasons for admission after RYGB were complications often thought to be procedure related, such as ventral hernia repair and gastric revision. In multivariate logistic regression models predicting 1-year readmission after RYGB, increasing Charlson Comorbidity Index score, and hospitalization in the 3-year period prior to RYGB were significantly associated with readmission within a year. Conclusions Increases in hospital use after surgery appear to be related to RYGB. Payers, clinicians, and patients must consider the not-inconsequential rate of rehospitalization after this type of surgery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Chart abstraction is a common method for measuring the quality of surgical care. In this study we examine how the use of standardized operative dictation and history forms improves documentation rates of bariatric quality measures. Materials and methods: Two independent reviewers evaluated 201 patient charts from two multi-surgeon bariatric surgery practices for documentation of five intraoperative and seven preoperative bariatric quality measures. Group 1 used fully standardized templates to dictate or collect both, while Group 2 did not. Documentation rates were compared between the groups. Results: Operative reports more consistently documented quality assessment information for cases where a dictation template was used versus where it was not (89% versus 58%, respectively, P < 0.001). The greatest discrepancies between the two groups were found in “exploration of the abdomen” (95% in Group 1 versus 43% in Group 2, P < 0.001) and in “evaluation of the gallbladder” (76% versus 28%, P < 0.001). In comparison, overall documentation rates for preoperative comorbidities were greater in both groups but remained higher for Group 1, who used fully standardized forms (98% versus 74%, P < 0.001). Group 1 had statistically significant higher rates of documentation for all seven comorbidities. Conclusions: The use of standardized dictation templates and history forms is associated with significantly higher documentation rates of quality measures in bariatric surgery. The adoption of these methods into routine use will be needed to allow for wide scale quality assessment and improvement for surgical practices. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]