Literature DB >> 10875583

The learning curve of an academic cardiac surgeon: use of the CUSUM method.

R J Novick1, L W Stitt.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite the sizeable volume of research on the determinants of outcome after cardiac operations, few articles have analyzed the learning curves of individual cardiac surgeons over time. The objective of our study was to analyze statistically the learning curve of an academic cardiac surgeon in reducing operative morbidity and mortality during a 10-year interval.
METHODS: The study cohort of 1347 consecutive and unselected patients undergoing cardiac surgical operations from October 1988 to September 1998 were grouped into five 2-year blocks (periods 1 to 5) according to the date of operation. The main outcome measures were operative mortality rate and standardized definitions of perioperative myocardial infarction, intra-aortic balloon pump use, reoperation for bleeding, stroke, sternal wound complications, sepsis, and respiratory insufficiency. Preoperative risk factors and operative results in periods 1 to 5 were compared statistically using a chi-square test for linear trend (categorical variables) or analysis of variance with linear contrast and lack of fit tests (continuous variables). In addition, the cumulative sum (CUSUM) method was used to determine the association among operative morbidity, mortality, and prespecified 80% alert and 95% alarm boundary lines in practice years 1, 5, and 9.
RESULTS: Of the preoperative risk factors, only patient age showed an important change during the 10 years of the study (61.3+/-0.7 to 64.3+/-0.6, p = 0.001). There were no statistically significant changes from periods 1 to 5 in overall operative mortality (4.0% to 2.2%, p = 0.56) or in the rates of perioperative stroke (1.8% to 3.8%, p = 0.33), sternal wound complications (0.4% to 0.8%, p = 0.97), sepsis (0.9% to 0.8%, p = 0.63), or respiratory failure (4.4% to 2.8%, p = 0.21). Decreases occurred in a linear fashion during periods 1 to 5 in mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting (5.1% to 1.3%, p = 0.012) and in the rates of perioperative myocardial infarction (7.0% to 2.2%, p = 0.005), intra-aortic balloon pump use (7.0% to 3.0%, p = 0.05), and reoperation for bleeding (8.4% to 2.2%, p = 0.001). The number of uneventful cases between a death or complication increased from 2.82+/-0.43 in period 1 to 6.44+/-1.10 in period 5 (p < 0.001). On CUSUM analysis, the cumulative failure rate in year 1 transgressed the upper 80% alert line after 56 cases and the upper 95% alarm line after 69 cases. During years 5 and 9 the failure rate gravitated around the 80% and 95% "reassurance" lines, respectively, indicating improved results as compared to year 1.
CONCLUSIONS: The mortality rate after coronary artery bypass grafting and select perioperative morbidity rates improved in a linear fashion from the onset of independent practice to year 10. The CUSUM method was helpful in identifying suboptimal results during the first year of practice and shows promise as a method of prospective quality control in cardiac surgery. These data support mentorship of new consultants by a senior surgeon during the first year or two of independent practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10875583     DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-8191.1999.tb01001.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Card Surg        ISSN: 0886-0440            Impact factor:   1.620


  20 in total

Review 1.  Quality control of surgical and interventional procedures: a review of the CUSUM.

Authors:  David J Biau; Mathieu Resche-Rigon; Gaëlle Godiris-Petit; Rémy S Nizard; Raphaël Porcher
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2007-06

2.  Learning curves in orthopaedic surgery: a case for super-specialisation?

Authors:  N P M Jain; A J L Jowett; N M P Clarke
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2007-03       Impact factor: 1.891

3.  Assessment of Surgical Learning Curves in Transoral Robotic Surgery for Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Oropharynx.

Authors:  William G Albergotti; William E Gooding; Mark W Kubik; Mathew Geltzeiler; Seungwon Kim; Umamaheswar Duvvuri; Robert L Ferris
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2017-06-01       Impact factor: 6.223

Review 4.  Update on resident training models for ureteroscopy.

Authors:  Ephrem O Olweny; Margaret S Pearle
Journal:  Curr Urol Rep       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 3.092

5.  The clinical safety of performing laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer by trainees after sufficient experience in assisting.

Authors:  Souya Nunobe; Naoki Hiki; Shinya Tanimura; Kyoko Nohara; Takeshi Sano; Toshiharu Yamaguchi
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 3.352

6.  The multiphasic learning curve for robot-assisted rectal surgery.

Authors:  Kevin Kaity Sng; Masayasu Hara; Jae-Won Shin; Byung-Eun Yoo; Kyung-Sook Yang; Seon-Hahn Kim
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-03-19       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Learning curves and surgical outcomes for proctored adoption of laparoscopic ventral mesh rectopexy: cumulative sum curve analysis.

Authors:  Philip H Pucher; Damian Mayo; Anthony R Dixon; Andrew Clarke; Michael J Lamparelli
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 4.584

8.  Risk-adjusted mortality rate cumulative sum analysis based on the Japan SCORE represents a learning curve in mitral valve reparative surgery.

Authors:  Min-Ho Song; Fumiaki Kuwabara; Toshiaki Ito
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2014-01-17       Impact factor: 2.549

9.  Efficacy of intraoperative cell salvage in decreasing perioperative blood transfusion rates in first-time cardiac surgery patients: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Claudia L Côté; Alexandra M Yip; Jeffrey B MacLeod; Bill O'Reilly; Joshua Murray; Maral Ouzounian; Craig D Brown; Rand Forgie; Marc P Pelletier; Ansar Hassan
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2016-09       Impact factor: 2.089

10.  CUSUM analysis of J-pouch surgery reflects no learning curve after board certification.

Authors:  Patrick H D Colquhoun
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2008-08       Impact factor: 2.089

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.