6.G. Workshop: Quality assessment in perioperative care: Challenges and lessons learned from the SAFEST project
Authors:   Organised by: EUPHA-INJ, Avedis Donabedian Research Institute, Spanish Anaesthesia and Reanimation Safety Incident Reporting System, National School of Public Health - NOVA, University of Lisbon, SAFEST Consortium,   Chair persons: Maria Papadakaki (EUPHA-INJ), Paulo Sousa (Portugal)
Published: October 2023

Approximately 313 million surgical procedures are performed worldwide annually, with millions of patients experiencing health benefits while many suffer perioperative complications and harm. World Bank estimations show over 7 million people suffering surgical complications annually, with 4.2 million deaths occurring within 30 days of surgery, placing perioperative mortality as the third most common cause of death. Beyond the ethical issues of patients suffering personal harm while undergoing care, the burden on the health system due to prolonged length of stay and treatment is critical. Perioperative morbidity and mortality have thus become a high-priority public health problem for health systems. Attempts to set targets for improvement adopted well-known conceptual frameworks to categorise areas of evaluation (e.g., Donabedian model) and acknowledged the multifactorial root of perioperative harm and the various patient-condition and system-level factors have been fundamental in perioperative safety. International collaboration is active in seeking to address the challenges of measurement and reporting (COMPAC-StEP), while various tools have been utilised for that purpose (e.g., WHO surgical safety checklist). Several indicators, agreed among experts based on empirical research, have been adopted to assess quality at pre- intra- and postoperative care, but seen as blunt to accurately describe system performance and indicate areas of improvement. This has resulted in poorly defined measures of uncertain value, lacking validity, reliability, and lawfulness, and raising doubts about their true impact on patient safety. On the other hand, patient-centeredness and meaningfulness for patients remain unclear, while traditional clinical measures are increasingly found inadequate to capture all aspects of patient care and recovery. Overall, evidence is still conflicting regarding the most appropriate markers of quality, while long-term and patient-centred outcomes are gaining more scientific attention, despite the various implementation challenges. Greater involvement of patients in the development and selection process of quality indicators is seen as fundamental to better reflect patient values in quality targets in healthcare. A main goal of the workshop is to discuss the challenges and the latest developments in quality assessment in perioperative care and turn the attention towards “evidence-based indicators” for improving quality of care and safety in the perioperative period. The SAFEST project and its approach to developing recommendations and core indicators for patient safety in perioperative care will be presented. The special contribution of patient representatives in the SAFEST stakeholder consensus will be identified. Attributes of ideal quality indicators will be highlighted with reference to evidence-based, important reliable, and actionable indicators and those most prominent in measuring patient-related outcomes of care.

Key messages

• Translating perioperative safety clinical guidelines recommendations into measurable standards and assess a core of indicators will enhance the implementation of patient safety best practices.