Background: Failure-to-rescue is defined as the conditional probability of death after a complication, and the failure-to-rescue rate reflects a center's ability to successfully "rescue" patients after complications. The validity of the failure-to-rescue rate as a quality measure is dependent on the preventability of death and the appropriateness of this measure for use in the trauma population is untested. We sought to evaluate the relationship between preventability and failure-to-rescue in trauma.
Methods: All adjudications from a mortality review panel at an academic level I trauma center from 2005-2015 were merged with registry data for the same time period. The preventability of each death was determined by panel consensus as part of peer review. Failure-to-rescue deaths were defined as those occurring after any registry-defined complication. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression models between failure-to-rescue status and preventability were constructed and time to death was examined using survival time analyses.
Results: Of 26,557 patients, 2,735 (10.5%) had a complication, of whom 359 died for a failure-to-rescue rate of 13.2%. Of failure-to-rescue deaths, 272 (75.6%) were judged to be non-preventable, 65 (18.1%) were judged potentially preventable, and 22 (6.1%) were judged to be preventable by peer review. After adjusting for other patient factors, there remained a strong association between failure-to-rescue status and potentially preventable (odds ratio 2.32, 95% confidence interval, 1.47-3.66) and preventable (odds ratio 14.84, 95% confidence interval, 3.30-66.71) judgment.
Conclusion: Despite a strong association between failure-to-rescue status and preventability adjudication, only a minority of deaths meeting the definition of failure to rescue were judged to be preventable or potentially preventable. Revision of the failure-to-rescue metric before use in trauma care benchmarking is warranted.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.