Literature DB >> 18336703

SRTR program-specific reports on outcomes: a guide for the new reader.

D M Dickinson1, C J Arrington, G Fant, G N Levine, D E Schaubel, T L Pruett, M S Roberts, R A Wolfe.   

Abstract

Differences in outcomes indeed exist among transplant programs and organ procurement organizations (OPO). A growing set of tools are available from the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) to measure and assess these outcomes in the different phases of the transplant process. These tools are not intended to compare two individual programs, rather to help identify programs whose practices may need further scrutiny, to be either avoided, corrected or emulated. To understand which differences in outcomes might be due to underlying differences in populations served and which might be due to differences in treatment, it is important to compare outcomes to 'risk-adjusted' expected values. Further, it is important to recognize and assess the role that random chance may play in these outcomes by considering the p-value or confidence interval of each estimate. We present the reader with a basic explanation of these tools and their interpretation in the context of reading the SRTR Program-Specific Reports. We describe the intended audience of these reports, including patients, monitoring and process improvement bodies, payers and others such as the media. Use of these statistics in a way that reflects a basic understanding of these concepts and their limitations is beneficial for all audiences.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18336703     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2008.02178.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Transplant        ISSN: 1600-6135            Impact factor:   8.086


  13 in total

1.  Temporal trends in liver transplant centre volume in the USA.

Authors:  Elisabeth T Tracy; Kyla M Bennett; Emeline M Aviki; Theodore N Pappas; Bradley H Collins; Janet E Tuttle-Newhall; Carlos E Marroquin; Paul C Kuo; John E Scarborough
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2009-08       Impact factor: 3.647

2.  Considering potential benefits and consequences of hospital report cards: what are the next steps?

Authors:  Jesse D Schold; Lauren Hersch Nicholas
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 3.402

3.  Building an Ideal Quality Metric for ESRD Health Care Delivery.

Authors:  Jesse D Schold; Laura D Buccini; Michael P Phelan; Colleen L Jay; David A Goldfarb; Emilio D Poggio; John R Sedor
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2017-05-17       Impact factor: 8.237

4.  Reported effects of the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients 5-tier rating system on US transplant centers: results of a national survey.

Authors:  Sarah E Van Pilsum Rasmussen; Alvin G Thomas; Jacqueline Garonzik-Wang; Macey L Henderson; Sarah S Stith; Dorry L Segev; Lauren Hersch Nicholas
Journal:  Transpl Int       Date:  2018-06-10       Impact factor: 3.782

Review 5.  Big data in organ transplantation: registries and administrative claims.

Authors:  A B Massie; L M Kucirka; L M Kuricka; D L Segev
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 8.086

Review 6.  Program-specific reports: implications and impact on program behavior.

Authors:  Lisa B VanWagner; Anton I Skaro
Journal:  Curr Opin Organ Transplant       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 2.640

7.  Impact of the lung allocation score on survival beyond 1 year.

Authors:  B G Maxwell; J E Levitt; B A Goldstein; J J Mooney; M R Nicolls; M Zamora; V Valentine; D Weill; G S Dhillon
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2014-09-10       Impact factor: 8.086

8.  Lung Transplant Pulmonologists' Views of Specialty Palliative Care for Lung Transplant Recipients.

Authors:  Eric Nolley; Jessica Fleck; Dio Kavalieratos; Mary Amanda Dew; Daniel Dilling; Rebecca Colman; Maria M Crespo; Hiliary Goldberg; Steven Hays; Ramsey Hachem; Erika Lease; James Lee; John Reynolds; Matthew Morrell; Yael Schenker
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2020-01-02       Impact factor: 2.947

9.  Patient selection and volume in the era surrounding implementation of Medicare conditions of participation for transplant programs.

Authors:  Sarah L White; Dawn M Zinsser; Matthew Paul; Gregory N Levine; Tempie Shearon; Valarie B Ashby; John C Magee; Yi Li; Alan B Leichtman
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-05-19       Impact factor: 3.402

10.  Effect of comorbidity adjustment on CMS criteria for kidney transplant center performance.

Authors:  E D Weinhandl; J J Snyder; A K Israni; B L Kasiske
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2009-02-03       Impact factor: 8.086

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.