The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Adverse events in surgical patients in Australia
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine the adverse event (AE) rate for surgical patients in Australia. DESIGN: A two-stage retrospective medical record review was conducted to determine the occurrence of AEs in hospital admissions. Medical records were screened for 18 criteria and positive records were reviewed by two medical officers using a structured questionnaire. SETTING: Admissions in 1992 to 28 randomly selected hospitals in Australia. STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred and twenty eligible admissions were randomly selected from in-patient database in each hospital. A total of 14,179 medical records were reviewed, with 8747 medical and 5432 surgical admissions. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measures included the rate of AEs in surgical and medical admissions, the proportion resulting in permanent disability and death, the proportion determined to be highly preventable, and the identification of risk factors associated with AEs. RESULTS: The AE rate for surgical admissions was 21.9%. Disability that was resolved within 12 months occurred in 83%, 13% had permanent disability, and 4% resulted in death. Reviewers found that 48% of AEs were highly preventable. The risk of an AE depended on the procedure and increased with age and length of stay. CONCLUSION: The high AE rate for surgical procedures supports the need for monitoring and intervention strategies. The 18 screening criteria provide a tool to identify admissions with a greater risk of a surgical AE. Risk factors for an AE were age and procedure, and these should be assessed prior to surgery. Prophylactic interventions for infection and deep vein thrombosis could reduce the occurrence of AEs in hospitals.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A surgical safety checklist to reduce morbidity and mortality in a global population
Haynes, A. B., Weiser, T. G., Berry, W. R., Lipsitz, S. R., Breizat, A.-H. S., Dellinger, E. P., Herbosa, T., Joseph, S., Kibatala, P. L., Lapitan, M. C. M., et al. (2009) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmsa0810119 · Cited by 5,688
Explainable machine-learning predictions for the prevention of hypoxaemia during surgery
Lundberg, S. M., Nair, B., Vavilala, M. S., Horibe, M., Eisses, M. J., Adams, T., Liston, D. E., Low, D. K.-W., Newman, S.-F., Kim, J., et al. (2018) · Nature Biomedical Engineering · doi:10.1038/s41551-018-0304-0 · Cited by 1,967
Panagioti, M., Khan, K., Keers, R. N., Abuzour, A., Phipps, D., Kontopantelis, E., Bower, P., Campbell, S., Haneef, R., Avery, A. J., et al. (2019) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l4185 · Cited by 874
Schwendimann, R., Blatter, C., Dhaini, S., Simon, M., & Ausserhofer, D. (2018) · BMC Health Services Research · doi:10.1186/s12913-018-3335-z · Cited by 423
A systematic survey of computer-aided diagnosis in medicine: Past and present developments
Yanase, J., & Triantaphyllou, E. (2019) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.112821 · Cited by 303
Metadata
- Authors
- KABLE, A. K., GIBBERD, R. W., & SPIGELMAN, A. D.
- Venue
- International Journal for Quality in Health Care
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2002-08-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 269-276
- ISSN
- 1353-4505 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-3677
- OpenAlex
- W2126132247
- Cited by
- 450
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 4.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Adverse events in surgical patients in Australia. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/intqhc/14.4.269
- The paper
- KABLE, A. K., GIBBERD, R. W., & SPIGELMAN, A. D. (2002). Adverse events in surgical patients in Australia. International Journal for Quality in Health Care. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/14.4.269
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.