Key result
No dedicated structure or team for emergency surgery was associated with a higher frequency of surgical delay compared to a dedicated room and team (49.1% vs 28.4%; OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.17-2.78).
Why the study?
In France, where 3 distinct hospital organizational pathways exist for surgical emergencies, neither the incidence nor the influence of delayed urgent surgery is known, and no guidelines are available.
Do dedicated emergency operating rooms and teams reduce the delay of emergency surgery in adult patients compared to no dedicated structures?
Cohort (n=1,149)
Yes
Do dedicated emergency operating rooms and teams reduce the delay of emergency surgery in adult patients compared to no dedicated structures?
Odds Ratio: 1.8 (95% CI 1.17–2.78)
Absolute Event Rate: 49.1% vs 28.4%
p-value: p=<.001
Organizational pathways with dedicated emergency operating rooms and teams are associated with significantly reduced delays for emergency surgery.
Dedicated pathways were associated with fewer delays; leaves open whether implementation improves outcomes without randomized confirmation.
Importance: Delayed admission of patients with surgical emergencies to the operating room occurs frequently and is associated with poor outcomes. In France, where 3 distinct organizational pathways in hospitals exist (a dedicated emergency operating room and team [DET], a dedicated operating room in a central operating theater [DOR], and no dedicated structure or team [NOR]), neither the incidence nor the influence of delayed urgent surgery is known, and no guidelines are available to date. Objective: To examine the overall frequency of delayed admission of patients with surgical emergencies to the operating room across the 3 organizational pathways in hospitals in France. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective multicenter cohort study was conducted in 10 French tertiary hospitals. All consecutive adult patients admitted for emergency surgery from October 5 to 16, 2020, were included and prospectively monitored. Patients requiring pediatric surgery, obstetrics, interventional radiology, or endoscopic procedures were excluded. Exposures: Emergency surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was the global incidence of delayed emergency surgery across 3 predefined organizational pathways: DET, DOR, and NOR. The ratio between the actual time to surgery (observed duration between surgical indication and incision) and the ideal time to surgery (predefined optimal duration between surgical indication and incision according to the Non-Elective Surgery Triage classification) was calculated for each patient. Surgery was considered delayed when this ratio was greater than 1. Results: A total of 1149 patients were included (mean [SD] age, 55 [21] years; 685 [59.9%] males): 649 in the DET group, 320 in the DOR group, and 171 in the NOR group (missing data: n = 5). The global frequency of surgical delay was 32.5% (95% CI, 29.8%-35.3%) and varied across the 3 organizational pathways: DET, 28.4% (95% CI, 24.8%-31.9%); DOR, 32.2% (95% CI, 27.0%-37.4%); and NOR, 49.1% (95% CI, 41.6%-56.7%) (P < .001). The adjusted odds ratio for delay was 1.80 (95% CI, 1.17-2.78) when comparing NOR with DET. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, the frequency of delayed emergency surgery in France was 32.5%. Reduced delays were found in organizational pathways that included dedicated theaters and teams. These preliminary results may pave the way for comprehensive large-scale studies, from which results may potentially inform new guidelines for quicker and safer access to emergency surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lepercq et al. (2023) conducted a cohort in Surgical emergencies (n=1,149). No dedicated structure or team (NOR) vs. Dedicated emergency operating room and team (DET) was evaluated on Global incidence of delayed emergency surgery (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.17-2.78, p=<.001). No dedicated structure or team for emergency surgery was associated with a higher frequency of surgical delay compared to a dedicated room and team (49.1% vs 28.4%; OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.17-2.78).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: