A longitudinal study examining the relationship between prioritization scores and changes in impact on life scores in elective surgery patients

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundHealthcare systems globally face the issue of resource constraints and need for prioritization of elective surgery. Inclusive, explicit prioritization tools are important in improving consistency and equity of access to surgery across health systems. The General Surgical Prioritization Tool developed by New Zealand's Ministry of Health scores patients for elective non‐cancer surgery based on surgeon's clinical judgement and patient derived Impact on Life (IoL) scores. This study aims to measure the changes in patient derived IoL scores after common general surgical procedures to enable direct comparison and inform future prioritization.MethodThis longitudinal observational study enrolled 322 participants who had undergone elective general surgical procedures. Participants were contacted 3 to 9 months after their procedures and requested to complete the IoL questionnaire. The primary endpoint was the change in IoL scores after surgery among the different procedures.ResultsOverall, 229/304 (75%) participants responded to the questionnaire and there were no significant baseline differences between responders and non‐responders. Patients in the gallbladder treatment group had the greatest improvement in IoL scores. Patients across all ethnic groups had similar changes in IoL scores. Multivariate analysis showed that gallbladder surgery (relative to hernia surgery) and pre‐surgery IoL scores significantly predicted improvement.ConclusionThe patient reported IoL score recorded at prioritization for surgery all reduced, albeit to varying amounts, after common general surgical procedures. This, combined with the fact that IoL scores predicted post‐operative improvement support their inclusion in prioritization tools in addition to surgeon derived components.