scholarly journals Severity grading system for acute allergic reactions: A multidisciplinary Delphi study

Author(s):  
Timothy E. Dribin ◽  
David Schnadower ◽  
Jonathan M. Spergel ◽  
Ronna L. Campbell ◽  
Marcus Shaker ◽  
...  
2013 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. P137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noriyuki Yanagida ◽  
Yuu Okada ◽  
Hasegawa Yukiko ◽  
Taro Miura ◽  
Ishida Wako ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. e000552 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kovi E Bessoff ◽  
Jeff Choi ◽  
Sylvia Bereknyei Merrell ◽  
Aussama Khalaf Nassar ◽  
David Spain ◽  
...  

ObjectiveEmergency general surgery (EGS) conditions encompass a variety of diseases treated by acute care surgeons. The heterogeneity of these diseases limits infrastructure to facilitate EGS-specific quality improvement (QI) and research. A uniform anatomic severity grading system for EGS conditions was recently developed to fill this need. We integrated this system into our clinical workflow and examined its impact on research, surgical training, communication, and patient care.MethodsThe grading system was integrated into our clinical workflow in a phased fashion through formal education and a written handbook. A documentation template was also deployed in our electronic medical record to prospectively assign severity scores at the time of patient evaluation. Mixed methods including a quantitative survey and qualitative interviews of trainees and attending surgeons were used to evaluate the impact of the new workflow and to identify obstacles to its adoption.ResultsWe identified 2291 patients presenting with EGS conditions during our study period. The most common diagnoses were small bowel obstruction (n=470, 20.5%), acute cholecystitis (n=384, 16.8%), and appendicitis (n=370, 16.1%). A total of 21 qualitative interviews were conducted. Twenty interviewees (95.2%) had a positive impression of the clinical workflow, citing enhanced patient care and research opportunities. Fifteen interviewees (75.0%) reported the severity grading system was a useful framework for clinical management, with five participants (25.0%) indicating the system was useful to facilitate clinical communication. Participants identified solutions to overcome barriers to adoption of the clinical workflow.ConclusionsThe uniform anatomic severity grading system can be readily integrated into a clinical workflow to facilitate prospective data collection for QI and research. The system is perceived as valuable by users. Educational initiatives that focus on increasing familiarity with the system and its benefits will likely improve adoption of the classification system and the clinical workflow that uses it.Level of evidenceLevel III.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (6) ◽  
pp. 1568-1576
Author(s):  
Victoria R Rendell ◽  
Alexander B Siy ◽  
Linda M Cherney Stafford ◽  
Ryan K Schmocker ◽  
Glen E Leverson ◽  
...  

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.


HPB ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 18 ◽  
pp. e728-e729 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Li ◽  
A. Alzudjali ◽  
K. Kloth ◽  
A. Suling ◽  
A. Kantas ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 161 (1) ◽  
pp. 173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael Denadai ◽  
Debora Romeo Bertola ◽  
Cassio Eduardo Raposo-Amaral

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document