Open AccessSeverity of Postoperative Complications From the Perspective of the Patient
Author(s) -
Victoria R. Rendell,
Alexander B. Siy,
Linda Stafford,
Ryan K. Schmocker,
Glen Leverson,
Emily R. Winslow
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
journal of patient experience
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2374-3743
pISSN - 2374-3735
DOI - 10.1177/2374373519893199
Subject(s) - concordance , complication , medicine , grading (engineering) , accordion , surgery , civil engineering , world wide web , computer science , engineering
Background: Although provider-derived surgical complication severity grading systems exist, little is known about the patient perspective. Objective: To assess patient-rated complication severity and determine concordance with existing grading systems. Methods: A survey asked general surgery patients to rate the severity of 21 hypothetical postoperative events representing grades 1 to 5 complications from the Accordion Severity Grading System. Concordance with the Accordion scale was examined. Separately, descriptive ratings of 18 brief postoperative events were ranked. Results: One hundred sixty-eight patients returned a mailed survey following their discharge from a general surgery service. Patients rated grade 4 complications highest. Grade 1 complications were rated similarly to grade 5 and higher than grades 2 and 3 ( P ≤ .01). Patients rated one event not considered an Accordion scale complication higher than all but grade 4 complications ( P < .001). The brief events also did not follow the Accordion scale, other than the grade 6 complication ranking highest. Conclusion: Patient-rated complication severity is discordant with provider-derived grading systems, suggesting the need to explore important differences between patient and provider perspectives.