Conference Coverage

The drive to cut readmissions after bariatric surgery continues with DROP project


 

EXPERT ANALYSIS AT THE ACS NSQIP NATIONAL CONFERENCE

References

The inpatient part of the bundle includes a “clinical roadmap” with a fixed length of stay. “There are expectations every single day about what’s going to happen to their care,” Dr. Morton said. “We give them a water bottle with the logo of the hospital. It’s a reminder for them to stay hydrated. They have a nutritional consult and they go through a checklist before they get discharged.”

The postoperative component of the DROP bundle includes a phone call to the patient following discharge. “They also get an appointment with a nutritionist within a month of surgery,” he said. “We treat readmissions seriously, like a complication.”

Data from a study of 18,296 primary bariatric surgery patients gleaned from 2012 ACS-NSQIP Participant Use Data Files found a 30-day readmission rate of 5.2% (Am J Surg 2016 Jul;212[1]:76-80). Compared with the patients’ counterparts who did not require readmission within 30 days, risk factors for those who did included body mass index greater than 50 kg/m2 (30.2% vs. 24.6%, respectively; P = .001); longer operative time (132 vs. 115 minutes; P = .001); length of stay greater than 4 days (9.57% vs. 3.36%; P = .001); surgical site infection (15.5% vs. 1.15%; P less than .001); urinary tract infection (3.15% vs. .65%; P less than .001), and deep vein thrombosis (3.58% vs. .13%; P less than .001). Common reasons for readmissions were GI-related (45%), dietary (33.5%), and bleeding (6.57%). Dr. Morton went on to report preliminary findings from 19,648 cases included in the DROP project, which began collecting data in March 2015 and has a yearlong goal of reducing national admission rates by 20%. The preintervention readmission rate was 4.79%. By the end of October 2015 the readmission rate had dropped to 4.30%. “One of the things we realized is that the hospitals with the higher readmission rates were the ones who had the greatest improvement,” Dr. Morton said. “They went from about 8% down to about 5.51%. We anticipate that for each quarter that we do this, we’ll continue to see improvement.”

Individual center results were made available in late January 2016 and reviewed with mentors. “They also received aggregated reports to see how they stacked up others as a benchmark,” Dr. Morton said.

Final results from DROP are expected to be released later in 2016.

Dr. Morton reported having no financial disclosures.

dbrunk@frontlinemedcom.com

Pages

Recommended Reading

VIDEO: Endoscopic pyloromyotomy works for gastroparesis when meds don’t
MDedge Surgery
Fresh Press: ACS Surgery News digital June issue is live on the website
MDedge Surgery
Bariatric surgery good deal for diabetes, but…
MDedge Surgery
Endoscopic, laparoscopic pseudocyst drainage comparable if necrotic debris minimal
MDedge Surgery
Good Reading – Surgeon writers share their experiences with a wider audience
MDedge Surgery
Endobariatrics: Coming to a clinic near you
MDedge Surgery
New antibiotics targeting MDR pathogens are expensive, but not impressive
MDedge Surgery
Fresh Press: ACS Surgery News digital July issue is available on the website
MDedge Surgery
Subtotal fenestrating cholecystectomy: Optimal ‘bailout’ for difficult cases
MDedge Surgery
Blood management strategy leads to cost savings, less waste
MDedge Surgery