4.4 Article

Is Office-Based Surgery Safe? Comparing Outcomes of 183,914 Aesthetic Surgical Procedures Across Different Types of Accredited Facilities

Journal

AESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL
Volume 37, Issue 2, Pages 226-235

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjw138

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: There has been a dramatic rise in office-based surgery. However, due to wide variations in regulatory standards, the safety of office-based aesthetic surgery has been questioned. Objectives: This study compares complication rates of cosmetic surgery performed at office-based surgical suites (OBSS) to ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) and hospitals. Methods: A prospective cohort of patients undergoing cosmetic surgery between 2008 and 2013 were identified from the CosmetAssure database (Birmingham, AL). Patients were grouped by type of accredited facility where the surgery was performed: OBSS, ASC, or hospital. The primary outcome was the incidence of major complication(s) requiring emergency room visit, hospital admission, or reoperation within 30 days postoperatively. Potential risk factors including age, gender, body mass index (BMI), smoking, diabetes, type of procedure, and combined procedures were reviewed. Results: Of the 129,007 patients (183,914 procedures) in the dataset, the majority underwent the procedure at ASCs (57.4%), followed by hospitals (26.7%) and OBSS (15.9%). Patients operated in OBSS were less likely to undergo combined procedures (30.3%) compared to ASCs (31.8%) and hospitals (35.3%, P <.01). Complication rates in OBSS, ASCs, and hospitals were 1.3%, 1.9%, and 2.4%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, there was a lower risk of developing a complication in an OBSS compared to an ASC (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.59-0.77, P <.01) or a hospital (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.52-0.68, P <.01). Conclusions: Accredited OBSS appear to be a safe alternative to ASCs and hospitals for cosmetic procedures. Plastic surgeons should continue to triage their patients carefully based on other significant comorbidities that were not measured in this present study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available