Effective peer review audit and identification of the surgeon outlier

Abstract

Background: Surgical audit aims to identify ways to maintain and improve the quality of care for patients, in part by assessment of a surgeon's activities and outcomes. However effective data systems to facilitate audit are uncommon. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of a tool for Peer Review Audit. Methods: All General Surgeons in Darwin and the Top End were encouraged to self-record their surgical activity, including procedures and adverse events related to procedures, using the College's Morbidity Audit and Logbook Tool (MALT). Results: A total of 6 surgeons and 3518 operative events were recorded in MALT between 2018 and 2019. De-identified reports of each surgeon's activities, compared directly to the audit group, were created by each surgeon, with correction for complexity of procedures and ASA status. Nine complications Grade 3 and greater were recorded, plus 6 deaths, 25 unplanned returns to theatre (8% failure to rescue rate), 7 unplanned admissions to ICU and 8 unplanned readmissions. One surgeon outlier was identified (>3 standard deviation over group mean) for unplanned returns to theatre. This surgeon's specific cases were reviewed at our morbidity and mortality meeting using the MALT Self Audit Report and changes were implemented as a result, with future progress monitored. Conclusion: The College's MALT system effectively enabled Peer Group Audit. All participating surgeons were readily able to present and validate their own results. A surgeon outlier was reliably identified. This led to effective practice change. The proportion of surgeons who participated was low. Adverse events were likely under-reported.