Umeå University's logo

umu.sePublications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Registration and validity of surgical complications in colorectal cancer surgery.
Department of Surgical Sciences, University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
2003 (English)In: British Journal of Surgery, ISSN 0007-1323, E-ISSN 1365-2168, Vol. 90, no 4, p. 454-9Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Population-based quality registers have become an important tool in quality assessment during the past decade. For registers to be reliable, however, data must be checked carefully for validity.

METHODS: The present study describes the validity of surgical complications registered in a national register run by the National Board of Health and Welfare (NBH), a register run by Regional Oncological Centres (ROC) and, for comparison, a local quality assurance system at Uppsala University Hospital (UUH). A specialized, independent surgeon checked 10 per cent of patient records against datasheets from the registers.

RESULTS: The local quality assurance system at UUH showed the best validity for surgical complications. Data for complications of colonic cancer surgery were more valid than those for rectal cancer surgery. Registration of serious complications was more valid than that of wound infections. The calculated proportion of missed surgical complications was 0.69, 0.64, 0.40, 0.22 and 0.07 for rectal and colonic cancer in the NBH register, rectal and colonic cancer in the ROC register, and the UUH register respectively. Corresponding figures for reoperation were 0.45, 0.48, 0.04, 0.09 and 0.21.

CONCLUSION: Local interest and routine use of data for quality assurance are crucial factors for valid registers. Careful monitoring of validity is necessary for use of registry data in structured systems for improvement of surgical results.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2003. Vol. 90, no 4, p. 454-9
National Category
Surgery
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:umu:diva-91648DOI: 10.1002/bjs.4058PubMedID: 12673748OAI: oai:DiVA.org:umu-91648DiVA, id: diva2:737562
Available from: 2014-08-13 Created: 2014-08-13 Last updated: 2018-06-07

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records

Gunnarsson, Ulf

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Gunnarsson, Ulf
In the same journal
British Journal of Surgery
Surgery

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 253 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf