Rectourethral fistulas: A comparison of the National Inpatient Sample and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

Andrew T. Schlussel, Michael B. Lustik, Conor P. Delaney, Sharon L. Stein, Harry L. Reynolds, Anthony J. Senagore, Eric K. Johnson, Scott R. Steele

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    3 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Background: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) may be used to evaluate outcomes for uncommon conditions such as rectourethral fistulas (RUFs). We sought to review cases of RUFs and compare variables from both registries to evaluate disparities among reported data. Methods: Review of NSQIP (2005-2013) and NIS (2006-2011) of all patients with a RUF or RUF repair based on . ICD-9-CM or CPT coding. Results: The NSQIP and NIS data sets were compared based on . International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis coding for a RUF (599.1; American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: n = 286, NIS: n = 2,357). Comorbidities varied between data sets, and in-hospital morbidity in RUF cases was greater in the NIS vs NSQIP data sets (48% vs 11%; . P < .01). Further analysis identified similar outcomes when cases of a RUF that underwent an operation were compared in the NSQIP (n = 284) and NIS (n = 274) database. Conclusions: This study represents the largest cohort of RUF cases and characterizes how using variables from both databases better elucidates details of this rare condition. These results exhibit how evaluating comparable metrics demonstrates inconsistencies between databases.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    JournalAmerican Journal of Surgery
    DOIs
    StateAccepted/In press - Jun 23 2016

    Fingerprint

    Quality Improvement
    Fistula
    Inpatients
    International Classification of Diseases
    Databases
    Registries
    Comorbidity
    Morbidity
    Datasets

    Keywords

    • Fistula
    • Outcomes assessment
    • Rectum
    • Urethra

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Surgery

    Cite this

    Rectourethral fistulas : A comparison of the National Inpatient Sample and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. / Schlussel, Andrew T.; Lustik, Michael B.; Delaney, Conor P.; Stein, Sharon L.; Reynolds, Harry L.; Senagore, Anthony J.; Johnson, Eric K.; Steele, Scott R.

    In: American Journal of Surgery, 23.06.2016.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Schlussel, Andrew T. ; Lustik, Michael B. ; Delaney, Conor P. ; Stein, Sharon L. ; Reynolds, Harry L. ; Senagore, Anthony J. ; Johnson, Eric K. ; Steele, Scott R. / Rectourethral fistulas : A comparison of the National Inpatient Sample and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. In: American Journal of Surgery. 2016.
    @article{17a0517f6b204dffba347d77bbef13fe,
    title = "Rectourethral fistulas: A comparison of the National Inpatient Sample and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program",
    abstract = "Background: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) may be used to evaluate outcomes for uncommon conditions such as rectourethral fistulas (RUFs). We sought to review cases of RUFs and compare variables from both registries to evaluate disparities among reported data. Methods: Review of NSQIP (2005-2013) and NIS (2006-2011) of all patients with a RUF or RUF repair based on . ICD-9-CM or CPT coding. Results: The NSQIP and NIS data sets were compared based on . International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis coding for a RUF (599.1; American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: n = 286, NIS: n = 2,357). Comorbidities varied between data sets, and in-hospital morbidity in RUF cases was greater in the NIS vs NSQIP data sets (48{\%} vs 11{\%}; . P < .01). Further analysis identified similar outcomes when cases of a RUF that underwent an operation were compared in the NSQIP (n = 284) and NIS (n = 274) database. Conclusions: This study represents the largest cohort of RUF cases and characterizes how using variables from both databases better elucidates details of this rare condition. These results exhibit how evaluating comparable metrics demonstrates inconsistencies between databases.",
    keywords = "Fistula, Outcomes assessment, Rectum, Urethra",
    author = "Schlussel, {Andrew T.} and Lustik, {Michael B.} and Delaney, {Conor P.} and Stein, {Sharon L.} and Reynolds, {Harry L.} and Senagore, {Anthony J.} and Johnson, {Eric K.} and Steele, {Scott R.}",
    year = "2016",
    month = "6",
    day = "23",
    doi = "10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.08.009",
    language = "English (US)",
    journal = "American Journal of Surgery",
    issn = "0002-9610",
    publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Rectourethral fistulas

    T2 - A comparison of the National Inpatient Sample and the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program

    AU - Schlussel, Andrew T.

    AU - Lustik, Michael B.

    AU - Delaney, Conor P.

    AU - Stein, Sharon L.

    AU - Reynolds, Harry L.

    AU - Senagore, Anthony J.

    AU - Johnson, Eric K.

    AU - Steele, Scott R.

    PY - 2016/6/23

    Y1 - 2016/6/23

    N2 - Background: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) may be used to evaluate outcomes for uncommon conditions such as rectourethral fistulas (RUFs). We sought to review cases of RUFs and compare variables from both registries to evaluate disparities among reported data. Methods: Review of NSQIP (2005-2013) and NIS (2006-2011) of all patients with a RUF or RUF repair based on . ICD-9-CM or CPT coding. Results: The NSQIP and NIS data sets were compared based on . International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis coding for a RUF (599.1; American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: n = 286, NIS: n = 2,357). Comorbidities varied between data sets, and in-hospital morbidity in RUF cases was greater in the NIS vs NSQIP data sets (48% vs 11%; . P < .01). Further analysis identified similar outcomes when cases of a RUF that underwent an operation were compared in the NSQIP (n = 284) and NIS (n = 274) database. Conclusions: This study represents the largest cohort of RUF cases and characterizes how using variables from both databases better elucidates details of this rare condition. These results exhibit how evaluating comparable metrics demonstrates inconsistencies between databases.

    AB - Background: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) and the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) may be used to evaluate outcomes for uncommon conditions such as rectourethral fistulas (RUFs). We sought to review cases of RUFs and compare variables from both registries to evaluate disparities among reported data. Methods: Review of NSQIP (2005-2013) and NIS (2006-2011) of all patients with a RUF or RUF repair based on . ICD-9-CM or CPT coding. Results: The NSQIP and NIS data sets were compared based on . International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification diagnosis coding for a RUF (599.1; American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: n = 286, NIS: n = 2,357). Comorbidities varied between data sets, and in-hospital morbidity in RUF cases was greater in the NIS vs NSQIP data sets (48% vs 11%; . P < .01). Further analysis identified similar outcomes when cases of a RUF that underwent an operation were compared in the NSQIP (n = 284) and NIS (n = 274) database. Conclusions: This study represents the largest cohort of RUF cases and characterizes how using variables from both databases better elucidates details of this rare condition. These results exhibit how evaluating comparable metrics demonstrates inconsistencies between databases.

    KW - Fistula

    KW - Outcomes assessment

    KW - Rectum

    KW - Urethra

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85005942627&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85005942627&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.08.009

    DO - 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.08.009

    M3 - Article

    C2 - 27816198

    AN - SCOPUS:85005942627

    JO - American Journal of Surgery

    JF - American Journal of Surgery

    SN - 0002-9610

    ER -