Background: Comparing outcomes across hospitals to learn from best performing hospitals can be valuable. However, reliably identifying best performance is challenging. This study assesses the possibility to distinguish best performing hospitals on single outcomes and consistency of performance on different outcomes. Methods: Data were derived from the Dutch ColoRectal Audit 2013–2015. Outcomes considered were textbook outcome (colon), (circumferential) resection margins, (serious) complications, mortality, and ‘failure to rescue’. To include uncertainty in rankings, random effect logistic regression models were used to calculate expected ranks (ERs), for each hospital and outcome. Rankability was calculated for each outcome, as a measure of reliability of ranking. Furthermore, correlation between ERs on different outcomes was assessed. Correlation was considered weak <0.40, moderate between 0.40 - 0.59 and strong >0.60. Results: The study included 32 143 patients; of whom 11 373 were treated in 2015 across 84 hospitals, 8181 colon and 3192 rectal cancer patients. In this one-year period ‘Postoperative complications’ had the highest rankability for colon (57%) and rectal (41%) surgery. No (group of) hospital(s) had the highest ER(s) on all outcomes. Correlation between ERs of outcomes was moderate in 2 (of 25) and strong in 4 (of 25) combinations. Rankability of colorectal mortality increased from 14% in 2015 to 35% when data over 2013–2015 were used. Conclusion: The highest reliability of identifying best performance based on an outcome was 57%. However, the balance between reliability and relevance of outcomes is vulnerable. No (group of) hospital(s) could be identified as best performer on all outcomes. Performance was not consistent on outcomes.@en

Objectives Hospital variation in risk-adjusted outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery has been shown. However, explanatory factors are not sufficiently clear. The objective of this study was to identify factors perceived by gastrointestinal surgeons as important to achieve excellent casemix-adjusted outcomes after colorectal cancer surgery. Design Based on literature and experts' opinion, 86 factors associated with serious complications, failure to rescue and mortality were listed. These were presented to gastrointestinal surgeons through two web-based surveys and an expert meeting. Participants were asked to choose their top 10 of most important factors. Participants Dutch gastrointestinal surgeons (n=52) of different hospitals and different hospital types (general/teaching/academic). Results Of 31 invited experts for the first survey and meeting, 71% responded. Of 130 invited surgeons, 34 responded to the second survey. Factors deemed important were: procedural hospital volume (46% in top 10), specialised surgeons performing surgery, (elective 87%, emergency 60% and reoperations 62% in top 10), accessibility of, and daily ward rounds by specialised surgeons (41% and 38% in top 10), preoperative screening for malnutrition (57% in top 10), a protocol for recognition of anastomotic leakage and rapid reintervention (54% and 49% in top 10). Conclusion Procedural hospital volume, specialisation of surgeons, screening for malnutrition, early recognition of complications followed by rapid action were perceived as most important factors to achieve good outcomes by gastrointestinal surgeons.@en

Background Surgical resection with restoration of bowel continuity is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with colonic cancer. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for anastomotic leakage (AL) and subsequent death after colonic cancer surgery. Methods Data were retrieved from the Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit. Patients undergoing colonic cancer resection with creation of an anastomosis between January 2009 to December 2011 were included. Outcomes were AL requiring reintervention and postoperative mortality following AL. Results AL occurred in 7·5 per cent of 15 667 patients. Multivariable analyses identified male sex, high American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) fitness grade, extensive tumour resection, emergency surgery, and surgical resection types such as transverse resection, left colectomy and subtotal colectomy as independent risk factors for AL. A defunctioning stoma was created in a small group of patients, leading to a lower risk of leakage. The mortality rate was 4·1 per cent overall, and was significantly higher in patients with AL than in those without leakage (16·4 versus 3·1 per cent; P < 0·001). Multivariable analyses identified older age, high ASA grade, high Charlson score and emergency surgery as independent risk factors for death after AL. The adjusted risk of death after AL was twice as high following right compared with left colectomy. Conclusion The elderly and patients with co-morbidity have a higher risk of death after AL. Accurate preoperative patient selection, intensive postoperative surveillance for AL, and early and aggressive treatment of suspected leakage is important, especially in patients undergoing right colectomy.

@en