Literature DB >> 22682114

Report of a consensus conference on transplant program quality and surveillance.

B L Kasiske1, M A McBride, D L Cornell, R S Gaston, M L Henry, F D Irwin, A K Israni, N W Metzler, K W Murphy, A I Reed, J P Roberts, N Salkowski, J J Snyder, S C Sweet.   

Abstract

Public reports of organ transplant program outcomes by the US Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients have been both groundbreaking and controversial. The reports are used by regulatory agencies, private insurance providers, transplant centers and patients. Failure to adequately adjust outcomes for risk may cause programs to avoid performing transplants involving suitable but high-risk candidates and donors. At a consensus conference of stakeholders held February 13-15, 2012, the participants recommended that program-specific reports be better designed to address the needs of all users. Additional comorbidity variables should be collected, but innovation should also be protected by excluding patients who are in approved protocols from statistical models that identify underperforming centers. The potential benefits of hierarchical and mixed-effects statistical methods should be studied. Transplant centers should be provided with tools to facilitate quality assessment and performance improvement. Additional statistical methods to assess outcomes at small-volume transplant programs should be developed. More data on waiting list risk and outcomes should be provided. Monitoring and reporting of short-term living donor outcomes should be enhanced. Overall, there was broad consensus that substantial improvement in reporting outcomes of transplant programs in the United States could and should be made in a cost-effective manner. © Copyright 2012 The American Society of Transplantation and the American Society of Transplant Surgeons.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22682114     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04130.x

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


  27 in total

Review 1.  New Solutions to Reduce Discard of Kidneys Donated for Transplantation.

Authors:  Peter P Reese; Meera N Harhay; Peter L Abt; Matthew H Levine; Scott D Halpern
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 10.121

2.  Factors leading to the discard of deceased donor kidneys in the United States.

Authors:  Sumit Mohan; Mariana C Chiles; Rachel E Patzer; Stephen O Pastan; S Ali Husain; Dustin J Carpenter; Geoffrey K Dube; R John Crew; Lloyd E Ratner; David J Cohen
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2018-05-05       Impact factor: 10.612

Review 3.  IMPROVING LONG-TERM OUTCOMES IN KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION: TOWARDS A NEW PARADIGM OF POST-TRANSPLANT CARE IN THE UNITED STATES.

Authors:  Robert S Gaston
Journal:  Trans Am Clin Climatol Assoc       Date:  2016

4.  Patients prioritize waitlist over posttransplant outcomes when evaluating kidney transplant centers.

Authors:  Syed Ali Husain; Corey Brennan; Ariane Michelson; Demetra Tsapepas; Rachel E Patzer; Jesse D Schold; Sumit Mohan
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2018-07-30       Impact factor: 8.086

5.  Potential Implications of Recent and Proposed Changes in the Regulatory Oversight of Solid Organ Transplantation in the United States.

Authors:  B L Kasiske; N Salkowski; A Wey; A K Israni; J J Snyder
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2016-07-28       Impact factor: 8.086

6.  A novel patient-centered "intention-to-treat" metric of U.S. lung transplant center performance.

Authors:  Dawn A Maldonado; Arindam RoyChoudhury; David J Lederer
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2017-09-26       Impact factor: 8.086

7.  Quality Metrics in Solid Organ Transplantation: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Kendra E Brett; Lindsay J Ritchie; Emily Ertel; Alexandria Bennett; Greg A Knoll
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  2018-07       Impact factor: 4.939

8.  Seeking new answers to old questions about public reporting of transplant program performance in the United States.

Authors:  Bertram L Kasiske; Andrew Wey; Nicholas Salkowski; David Zaun; Cory R Schaffhausen; Ajay K Israni; Jon J Snyder
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2018-09-06       Impact factor: 8.086

9.  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 10.  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

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.