Literature DB >> 23129119

Quality assessment in pancreatic surgery: what might tomorrow require?

Brian T Kalish1, Charles M Vollmer, Tara S Kent, William H Nealon, Jennifer F Tseng, Mark P Callery.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) defines healthcare quality across six domains: safety, timeliness, effectiveness, patient centeredness, efficiency, and equitability. We asked experts in pancreatic surgery (PS) whether improved quality metrics are needed, and how they could align to contemporary IOM healthcare quality domains.
METHODS: We created and distributed a web-based survey to pancreatic surgeons. Respondents ranked 62 proposed PS quality metrics on level of importance (LoI) and aligned each metric to one or more IOM quality domains (multi-domain alignment (MDA)). LoI and MDA scores for a given quality metric were averaged together to render a total quality score (TQS) normalized to a 100-point scale.
RESULTS: One hundred six surgeons (21 %) completed the survey. Ninety percent of respondents indicated a definite or probable need for improved quality metrics in PS. Metrics related to mortality, to rates and severity of complications, and to access to multidisciplinary services had the highest TQS. Metrics related to patient satisfaction, costs, and patient demographics had the lowest TQS. The least represented IOM domains were equitability, efficiency, and patient-centeredness.
CONCLUSIONS: Experts in pancreatic surgery have significant consensus on 12 proposed metrics of quality that they view as both highly important and aligned with more than one IOM healthcare quality domain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23129119     DOI: 10.1007/s11605-012-2052-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg        ISSN: 1091-255X            Impact factor:   3.452


  16 in total

1.  The effect of race on coronary bypass operative mortality.

Authors:  C R Bridges; F H Edwards; E D Peterson; L P Coombs
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2000-11-15       Impact factor: 24.094

2.  Race and surgical mortality in the United States.

Authors:  F L Lucas; Therese A Stukel; Arden M Morris; Andrea E Siewers; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  The relationship between patients' perception of care and measures of hospital quality and safety.

Authors:  Thomas Isaac; Alan M Zaslavsky; Paul D Cleary; Bruce E Landon
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2010-05-28       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Patient socioeconomic status is an independent predictor of operative mortality.

Authors:  Kyla M Bennett; John E Scarborough; Theodore N Pappas; Thomas B Kepler
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2010-09       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  Predictors of surgical intervention for hepatocellular carcinoma: race, socioeconomic status, and hospital type.

Authors:  Yulia Zak; Kim F Rhoads; Brendan C Visser
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2011-03-21

6.  Deviation-based cost modeling: a novel model to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of clinical pathways.

Authors:  Tsafrir Vanounou; Wande Pratt; Josef E Fischer; Charles M Vollmer; Mark P Callery
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 6.113

7.  Quality assessment in high-acuity surgery: volume and mortality are not enough.

Authors:  Charles M Vollmer; Wande Pratt; Tsafrir Vanounou; Shishir K Maithel; Mark P Callery
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2007-04

8.  Racial and ethnic differences in the use of high-volume hospitals and surgeons.

Authors:  Andrew J Epstein; Bradford H Gray; Mark Schlesinger
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2010-02

9.  Assessment of pancreatic cancer care in the United States based on formally developed quality indicators.

Authors:  Karl Y Bilimoria; David J Bentrem; Keith D Lillemoe; Mark S Talamonti; Clifford Y Ko
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2009-06-09       Impact factor: 13.506

10.  Treatment differences between blacks and whites with colorectal cancer.

Authors:  J K Ball; A Elixhauser
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Quality Indicators in Pancreatic Surgery: Lessons Learned from the German DGAV StuDoQ|Pancreas Registry.

Authors:  Ulrich F Wellner; Tobias Keck
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2017-03-30

Review 2.  [Quality indicators for pancreatic surgery : Scientific derivation and clinical relevance].

Authors:  U F Wellner; R Grützmann; T Keck; N Nüssler; H E Witzigmann; H-J Buhr
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 0.955

3.  Perception Is Reality: quality metrics in pancreas surgery - a Central Pancreas Consortium (CPC) analysis of 1399 patients.

Authors:  Daniel E Abbott; Grace Martin; David A Kooby; Nipun B Merchant; Malcolm H Squires; Shishir K Maithel; Sharon M Weber; Emily R Winslow; Clifford S Cho; David J Bentrem; Hong Jin Kim; Charles R Scoggins; Robert C Martin; Alexander A Parikh; William G Hawkins; Syed A Ahmad
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2016-03-02       Impact factor: 3.647

Review 4.  Limited surgery for benign tumours of the pancreas: a systematic review.

Authors:  H G Beger; M Siech; B Poch; B Mayer; M H Schoenberg
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  A machine learning risk model based on preoperative computed tomography scan to predict postoperative outcomes after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Authors:  Giovanni Capretti; Cristiana Bonifacio; Crescenzo De Palma; Martina Nebbia; Caterina Giannitto; Pierandrea Cancian; Maria Elena Laino; Luca Balzarini; Nickolas Papanikolaou; Victor Savevski; Alessandro Zerbi
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2021-10-01

Review 6.  Outcome quality standards in advanced ovarian cancer surgery.

Authors:  Antoni Llueca; Anna Serra; Maria Teresa Climent; Blanca Segarra; Yasmine Maazouzi; Marta Soriano; Javier Escrig
Journal:  World J Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 2.754

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.