Consensus recommendations on how to assess the quality of surgical interventions

Postoperative complications represent a major public health burden worldwide. Without standardized, clinically relevant and universally applied endpoints, the evaluation of surgical interventions remains ill-defined and inconsistent, opening the door for biased interpretations and hampering patient-centered health care delivery. We conducted a Jury-based consensus conference incorporating the perspectives of different stakeholders, who based their recommendations on the work of nine panels of experts. The recommendations cover the selection of postoperative outcomes from the perspective of patients and other stakeholders, comparison and interpretation of outcomes, consideration of cultural and demographic factors, and strategies to deal with unwarranted outcomes. With the recommendations developed exclusively by the Jury, we provide a framework for surgical outcome assessment and quality improvement after medical interventions, that integrates the main stakeholders' perspectives. The Outcome4Medicine consensus group outline recommendations for postoperative outcome assessment, with the ultimate goal of improving care quality and patient health.

Automated summary

Postoperative complications are a significant global public health burden. The lack of standardized and universally applied endpoints for evaluating surgical interventions leads to inconsistent and biased interpretations, hindering patient-centered healthcare delivery. A jury-based consensus conference was conducted to develop recommendations for postoperative outcome assessment, incorporating the perspectives of different stakeholders. The Outcome4Medicine consensus group provides a framework for surgical outcome assessment and quality improvement, integrating the perspectives of the main stakeholders, with the goal of enhancing care quality and patient health.