Literature DB >> 20447183

CMS oversight, OPOs and transplant centers and the law of unintended consequences.

Richard J Howard1, Danielle L Cornell, Jesse D Schold.   

Abstract

The Health Resources and Services Administration launched collaboratives with the goals of increasing donation rates, increasing the number of organs transplanted, eliminating deaths on the waiting list and improving outcomes. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) recently published requirements for organ procurement organizations (OPOs) and transplant centers. Failure to meet CMS performance measures could result in OPOs losing their service area or transplant centers losing their CMS certification. CMS uses analyses by the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) to evaluate a transplant center's performance based on risk-adjusted outcomes. However, CMS also uses a more liberal (one-sided) statistical test rendering more centers likely to qualify as low performing. Furthermore, the SRTR model does not incorporate some important patient variables in its statistical model which may result in biased determinations of quality of care. Cumulatively, there is much unexplained variation for transplant outcomes as suggested by the low predictive ability of survival models compared to other disease contexts. OPOs and transplant centers are unlikely to quietly accept their elimination. They may take certain steps that can result in exclusion of candidates who might otherwise benefit from transplantation and/or result in fewer transplants through restricted use of organs thought to carry higher risk of failure. CMS should join with transplant organizations to ensure that the goals of the collaborative are not inhibited by their performance measures.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20447183     DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2009.01157.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Transplant        ISSN: 0902-0063            Impact factor:   2.863


  18 in total

1.  Achieving Equity through Reducing Variability in Accepting Deceased Donor Kidney Offers.

Authors:  Sumit Mohan; Mariana C Chiles
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2017-07-27       Impact factor: 8.237

2.  Survival Benefit in Older Patients Associated With Earlier Transplant With High KDPI Kidneys.

Authors:  Colleen L Jay; Kenneth Washburn; Patrick G Dean; Ryan A Helmick; Jacqueline A Pugh; Mark D Stegall
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 4.939

3.  Content Coverage Evaluation of the OMOP Vocabulary on the Transplant Domain Focusing on Concepts Relevant for Kidney Transplant Outcomes Analysis.

Authors:  Sylvia Cho; Margaret Sin; Demetra Tsapepas; Leigh-Anne Dale; Syed A Husain; Sumit Mohan; Karthik Natarajan
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2020-10-07       Impact factor: 2.342

4.  Association between kidney transplant center performance and the survival benefit of transplantation versus dialysis.

Authors:  Jesse D Schold; Laura D Buccini; David A Goldfarb; Stuart M Flechner; Emilio D Poggio; Ashwini R Sehgal
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2014-09-18       Impact factor: 8.237

5.  County socioeconomic characteristics and pediatric renal transplantation outcomes.

Authors:  Rebecca Miller; Clifford Akateh; Noelle Thompson; Dmitry Tumin; Don Hayes; Sylvester M Black; Joseph D Tobias
Journal:  Pediatr Nephrol       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 3.714

6.  Expanding transplant outcomes research opportunities through the use of a common data model.

Authors:  Sylvia Cho; Sumit Mohan; Syed Ali Husain; Karthik Natarajan
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2018-05-22       Impact factor: 8.086

Review 7.  Increasing the pool of deceased donor organs for kidney transplantation.

Authors:  Jesse D Schold; Dorry L Segev
Journal:  Nat Rev Nephrol       Date:  2012-03-27       Impact factor: 28.314

8.  The prognostic value of kidney transplant center report cards.

Authors:  J D Schold; L D Buccini; E L G Heaphy; D A Goldfarb; A R Sehgal; J Fung; E D Poggio; M W Kattan
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2013-05-24       Impact factor: 8.086

Review 9.  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

10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.