Literature DB >> 20131525

Surgical report cards: the myth and the reality.

Alan Henderson1.   

Abstract

There seems no good reason for doctors to work in secret. Individual users of healthcare and the community in general, which ultimately bears the cost, are perfectly entitled to know how their health services and health providers are performing. The promulgation of surgical report cards has been hailed by some as a liberating step in the right direction. This paper seeks to analyse, from a clinician's perspective, the evolution and limitations of report cards. Ultimately, the importance of report cards will not be their immediate utility, which is minimal, but as a first step in a much wider and far more important debate about how we meaningfully measure the quality of health services and providers (including managers and bureaucrats), the likely cost of such an enterprise, how much we are willing and able to pay and how we reconcile the competing needs of information versus clinical and preventive care when all are competing for the same and inadequate pool of resources.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20131525

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Monash Bioeth Rev        ISSN: 1321-2753


  18 in total

1.  Performance league tables: the NHS deserves better.

Authors:  Peymané Adab; Andrew M Rouse; Mohammed A Mohammed; Tom Marshall
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-01-12

2.  How to make a silk purse from a sow's ear--a comprehensive review of strategies to optimise data for corrupt managers and incompetent clinicians.

Authors:  David Pitches; Amanda Burls; Anne Fry-Smith
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-12-20

3.  Aortic stenosis.

Authors:  John Chambers
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2005-04-09

4.  Variability in treatment advice for elderly patients with aortic stenosis: a nationwide survey in The Netherlands.

Authors:  B J Bouma; J H van der Meulen; R B van den Brink; A E Arnold; A Smidts; L H Teunter; K I Lie; J G Tijssen
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 5.994

5.  Why do so few older people with aortic stenosis have valve replacement surgery?

Authors:  A R Abdul-Hamid; G P Mulley
Journal:  Age Ageing       Date:  1999-05       Impact factor: 10.668

6.  Prevalence of aortic valve abnormalities in the elderly: an echocardiographic study of a random population sample.

Authors:  M Lindroos; M Kupari; J Heikkilä; R Tilvis
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 24.094

7.  Use of public performance reports: a survey of patients undergoing cardiac surgery.

Authors:  E C Schneider; A M Epstein
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-05-27       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Outcomes of elderly patients aged 80 and over with symptomatic, severe aortic stenosis: impact of patient's choice of refusing aortic valve replacement on survival.

Authors:  P Kojodjojo; N Gohil; D Barker; P Youssefi; T V Salukhe; A Choong; M Koa-Wing; J Bayliss; D R Hackett; M A Khan
Journal:  QJM       Date:  2008-04-27

9.  The European System for Cardiac Operative Risk Evaluation (EuroSCORE) is not appropriate for withholding surgery in high-risk patients with aortic stenosis: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Dimitri Kalavrouziotis; Debbie Li; Karen J Buth; Jean-Francois Légaré
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 1.637

10.  Factors which influence the cardiac surgeon's decision not to operate on patients referred for consideration of surgery.

Authors:  Paul D Waterworth; Sing Y Soon; Rohith Govindraj; Rajesh Sivaprakasam; Mark Jackson; Antony D Grayson
Journal:  J Cardiothorac Surg       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 1.637

View more
  2 in total

1.  Surgeon report cards, clinical realities, and the quality of patient care.

Authors:  Justin Oakley
Journal:  Monash Bioeth Rev       Date:  2009-09

2.  Who is watching the watchmen: Is quality reporting ever harmful?

Authors:  R Scott Braithwaite; Arthur Caplan
Journal:  SAGE Open Med       Date:  2014-02-18
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.