Why the study?
Emergency laparotomy carries high morbidity and mortality, and early identification of high-risk patients facilitates timely care and resource allocation.
Does a trainee-led quality improvement programme increase the use of perioperative risk scoring in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy?
Does a trainee-led quality improvement programme increase the use of perioperative risk scoring in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy?
A trainee-led quality improvement programme successfully increased the use of perioperative risk assessment in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy across 15 Irish hospitals.
Supports trainee-led QI to increase risk scoring in emergency laparotomy; leaves open effects on outcomes and generalizability.
BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomy is associated with high morbidity and mortality. The early identification of high-risk patients allows for timely perioperative care and appropriate resource allocation. The aim of this study was to develop a nationwide surgical trainee-led quality improvement (QI) programme to increase the use of perioperative risk scoring in emergency laparotomy. METHODS: The programme was structured using the active implementation framework in 15 state-funded Irish hospitals to guide the staged implementation of perioperative risk scoring. The primary outcome was a recorded preoperative risk score for patients undergoing an emergency laparotomy at each site. RESULTS: The rate of patients undergoing emergency laparotomy receiving a perioperative risk score increased from 0-11 per cent during the exploratory phase to 35-100 per cent during the full implementation phase. Crucial factors for implementing changes included an experienced central team providing implementation support, collaborator engagement, and effective communication and social relationships. CONCLUSIONS: A trainee-led QI programme increased the use of perioperative risk assessment in patients undergoing emergency laparotomy, with the potential to improve patient outcomes and care delivery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Nally et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: