Information Links
Previous Issues Volume 9, Issue 2 - 2024
A Case Report for Quality Assurance: Understanding the NSQIP Database and Preventing Error in Peer Review
Katherine A O’Hanlan1,*, Michelle F Benoit2, Alexandra C Thanassi2, Sala J Thanassi2
1Laparoscopic Institute for Gynecology and Oncology, 40 Buckeye, Portola Valley, CA, USA
2Gynecologic Oncology Division of Gynecology Department of Surgery, Palo Alto VA Medical Center, 3801 Miranda Avenue Palo Alto, CA, USA
*Corresponding Author: Katherine A O’Hanlan, Laparoscopic Institute for Gynecology and Oncology, 40 Buckeye, Portola Valley, CA, USA, 94028-8015; Tel: 650-245-3250; Email: [email protected]
Received Date: January 11, 2024
Publication Date: February 09, 2024
Citation: O’Hanlan KA, et al. (2024). A Case Report for Quality Assurance: Understanding the NSQIP Database and Preventing Error in Peer Review. Mathews J Case Rep. 9(2):149.
Copyright: O’Hanlan KA, et al. © (2024)
ABSTRACT
Background: This report assesses the accuracy and applicability of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and MIDAS data to measure quality in a Gynecologic Oncology service. Method: A retrospective chart review (Canadian Task Force classification II-1) from a community hospital Quality Assurance committee’s evaluation of a Gynecologic Oncology service, assessing all patients undergoing any surgery on the Gynecologic Oncology service from January, 2014 to September, 2017. Results: Surgical data was tabulated from operative notes and office charts. NSQIP data was provided by the hospital Quality Assurance Department’s applications licensed from the American College of Surgeons. Proprietary MIDAS “Inpatient Takeback Rate” was provided by the hospital Quality Assurance Department. Conclusion: Hand-counting of hospital cases provided the most accurate and consistent results. NSQIP data provided variable accuracy in abstraction and coding but was limited to hysterectomy procedures. The MIDAS calculation was broadly inaccurate and should not be viewed as a quality indicator. Misinterpretation of quality data by a QA Department can adversely affect a surgeon’s practice. To further increase the accuracy and utility of the NSQIP database for Oncologic Gynecologists, suggestions for specific queries for Gynecologic Oncology and Gynecology case abstractions are made.
Keywords: Gynecologic oncology; Minimally invasive surgery; complications; laparotomy: National Surgical Quality Improvement Program; NSQIP, MIDAS, sham peer review
