Developing a risk stratification tool for audit of outcome after surgery for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma

Head and Neck

Volumn 39, Issue 7, 2017, Pages 1357-1363

  Tighe, David F ^a   Thomas, Alan J ^b   Sassoon, Isabel ^c   Kinsman, Robin ^d   McGurk, Mark ^e  

^a INSTITUTE OF CANCER RESEARCH   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF BRIGHTON   (United Kingdom)

^c KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^d Dendrite Clinical Systems Ltd   (United Kingdom)

^e GUY'S AND ST THOMAS' NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

audit; complications; head and neck; outcomes; squamous cell carcinoma

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; ARTIFICIAL NEURAL NETWORK; CANCER SURGERY; CASE MIX; CLINICAL AUDIT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DECISION TREE; FEMALE; HEAD AND NECK SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; HUMAN; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; RISK ASSESSMENT; VERY ELDERLY; BAYES THEOREM; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL TRIAL; DISEASE FREE SURVIVAL; HEAD AND NECK TUMOR; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; MULTICENTER STUDY; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; TUMOR INVASION; UNITED KINGDOM;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BAYES THEOREM; CARCINOMA, SQUAMOUS CELL; DISEASE-FREE SURVIVAL; FEMALE; HEAD AND NECK NEOPLASMS; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM INVASIVENESS; NEOPLASM STAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURVIVAL ANALYSIS; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 85016614806     PISSN: 10433074     EISSN: 10970347     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/hed.24769     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Nouraei SAR, Middleton SE, Hudovsky A, et al. A national analysis of the outcome of major head and neck cancer surgery: implications for surgeon-level data publication. Clin Otolaryngol. 2013;38(6):502–511.
2. Bilimoria KY, Liu Y, Paruch JL, et al. Development and evaluation of the Universal American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) surgical risk calculator: a decision aid and informed consent tool for patients and surgeons. Presented at the 2013 Annual ACS NSQIP Conference, San Diego, CA, July 2013.
3. Tighe D, Kwok A, Putcha V, McGurk M. Identification of appropriate outcome indices in head and neck cancer and factors influencing them. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;43(9):1047–1053.
4. Tighe D, Sassoon I, McGurk M. Validating a benchmarking tool for audit of early outcomes after operations for head and neck cancer. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2016.
5. Essentials of machine learning algorithms (with Python and R codes). http://www.analyticsvidhya.com/blog/2015/08/common-machine-learning-algorithms/. Accessed 7 January 2016.
6. National Adult Cardiac Surgery Audit 2003. https://www.ucl.ac.uk/nicor/audits/adultcardiac/documents/reports/annualreport2010-11. Accessed 7 January 2016.
7. Earnshaw JJ, Hamilton G. Vascular Society by Numbers. Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland Fourth National Vascular Database Report 2004. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2007;89(7):653–654.
8. Barbini E, Cevenini G, Scolletta S, Biagioli B, Giomarelli P, Barbini P. Comparative analysis of predictive models of morbidity in intensive care unit after cardiac surgery – part I: model planning. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2007;7:35.
9. Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004;240(2):205–213.
10. Nashef SA, Roques F, Michel P, Gauducheau E, Lemeshow S, Salamon R. European system for cardiac operative risk evaluation (EuroSCORE). Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 1999;16(1):9–13.
11. Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M. POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit. Br J Surg. 1991;78(3):355–360.
12. Samy AK, Murray G, MacBain G. Glasgow aneurysm score. Cardiovasc Surg. 1994;2(1):41–44.
13. Nouraei SA, Hudovsky A, Frampton AE, et al. A study of clinical coding accuracy in surgery: implications for the use of administrative big data for outcomes management. Ann Surg. 2015;261(6):1096–1107.
14. Nouraei SA, Mace AD, Middleton SE, et al. A stratified analysis of the perioperative outcome of 17623 patients undergoing major head and neck cancer surgery in England over 10 years: towards an informatics-based outcomes surveillance framework. Clin Otolaryngol. 2017;42(1):11–28.