The rate ofpatients decreased as hospitals implemented three specific care measures promoted by the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, according to a study funded by the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.
With surgical site infections (SSIs) after colectomy associated with high morbidity as the second leading hospital acquired infection, and costing the health care system approximately $315 million annually, investment in this quality improvement program could ease a tremendous burden, according to Joceline V. Vu, MD, general surgery resident at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and fellow investigators. The study was published in the Journal of the American College of Surgeons (
The study cohort included 5,742 colectomy patients at 1 of 52 hospitals associated with the Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative (MSQC) between 2012 and 2016. Investigators assessed the use of the MSQC-recommended care bundle – cefazolin/metronidazole, oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation, and postoperative day-1 glucose less than or equal to 140 mg/dL – and the impact of the bundle components on surgical site infection (SSI).
Patients were also split into groups based on the use of perioperative treatments previously found to be associated with SSI improvement, which included the three treatments in the care bundle as well as postoperative normothermia, minimally invasive surgery, and operative duration defined as either less than or greater than 100 minutes.
Those who had received these perioperative measures were given one point for each measure received.
Of the total, 8.1% of patients received 0-1 point, 22.2% received 2 points, 31.7% received 3 points, 27.2% received 4 points, and 10.7% received 5-6 points.
Patients were split relatively evenly between male and female, and the majority of patients were white across all six SSI perioperative groups.
Patients with 0-1 point were more likely to be older than 65 years (56.4%), while those who received 5-6 points were more likely to be between 45 and 64 years old (45.6% [P less than .001]).
Hospitals increased the use of three of the promoted processes (cefazolin/metronidazole, oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation, and normoglycemia) during 2012-2016, and average use scores for patients went from 1.1 to 1.5 (P less than .001), according to investigators. As the rate of cefazolin/metronidazole and oral antibiotics with mechanical bowel preparation use rose from 18.6% and 42.9%, respectively, to 32.3% and 62.0% (P less than .001), SSI rates fell from 6.7% to 3.9% (P = .012) during the same period. The change in the normoglycemia rate (48.9% to 57.7%) was not significant (P = .112).
Hospitals that used all six recommended items saw a slightly decreased rate of SSI (r = –.39) between 2012 and 2016, according to Dr. Vu and her colleagues. Patients who received more measures had lower rates of complications, with SSI rates at 5.7% for those with 0-1 point, compared with 1.1% in those with 5-6 (P less than .001).
Rates of sepsis, pneumonia, emergency department visits, readmission, reoperation, and morbidity were also significantly lower.
“The MSQC and other collaborative quality improvement organizations represent a step toward this vision [of a learning health care system],” according to Dr. Vu and her colleagues. “Collaborating organizations can identify problems in care, adopt practice changes, and analyze the effect of those changes in a timely fashion.”
The findings of this study may be limited by a selection bias of how many bundle procedures a patient received based on comorbidities such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, hypertension, and obesity, which were all higher among those with fewer points. Investigators were also unable to discern causality of certain results because of the observational nature of the study. Hospitals included in the cohort volunteered to use the MSQC infrastructure, which may have limited the generalizability of the study,
Investigators reported no relevant financial disclosures. The study was funded by the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan.
SOURCE: Vu, J V et al. .