Literature DB >> 26953295

Understanding The Strengths And Weaknesses Of Public Reporting Of Surgeon-Specific Outcome Data.

Elaine M Burns1, Chris Pettengell2, Thanos Athanasiou3, Ara Darzi4.   

Abstract

Public reporting of outcome data is increasingly being used at the institutional and clinician levels and has become mandatory in some parts of the United States and the United Kingdom. The intended benefits are to drive quality improvement, demonstrate transparency, facilitate patient choice, and allow identification of poor performance. Public reporting of surgeon-specific mortality data, however, may have unintended consequences that include causing surgeons to become risk-averse, discouraging innovation, having an impact on training, and prompting "gaming" in health care. Given the small number of some surgical operations performed by individual surgeons, such data are unlikely to identify outliers or poor performers in a valid way. If metrics are deemed necessary and required to be reported publicly, they should be procedure specific; account for sample size; and focus not solely on mortality but also on other outcomes such as quality of life, patient satisfaction, and experience. Project HOPE—The People-to-People Health Foundation, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Evidence-Based Medicine; Quality Of Care

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 26953295     DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0788

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)        ISSN: 0278-2715            Impact factor:   6.301


  11 in total

1. 

Authors:  David R Urbach; Danielle Martin
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2020-11-09       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Confronting the COVID-19 surgery crisis: time for transformational change.

Authors:  David R Urbach; Danielle Martin
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  2016 Revision of the SCAI position statement on public reporting.

Authors:  Lloyd W Klein; Kishore J Harjai; Fred Resnic; William S Weintraub; H Vernon Anderson; Robert W Yeh; Dmitriy N Feldman; Osvaldo S Gigliotti; Kenneth Rosenfeld; Peter Duffy
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Value-based Healthcare: Surgeon-specific Public Reporting in Total Joint Arthroplasty-A Rational Way Forward.

Authors:  Adam J Schwartz; Kevin J Bozic
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.755

Review 5.  Impact of public release of performance data on the behaviour of healthcare consumers and providers.

Authors:  David Metcalfe; Arturo J Rios Diaz; Olubode A Olufajo; M Sofia Massa; Nicole Abm Ketelaar; Signe A Flottorp; Daniel C Perry
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-09-06

6.  Accounting for past patient composition in evaluations of quality reporting.

Authors:  Katherine I Tierney; Samuel Fishman
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 3.734

7.  Public reporting as a prescriptions quality improvement measure in primary care settings in China: variations in effects associated with diagnoses.

Authors:  Yuqing Tang; Chaojie Liu; Xinping Zhang
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 4.379

8.  Evaluating the collection, comparability and findings of six global surgery indicators.

Authors:  H Holmer; A Bekele; L Hagander; E M Harrison; P Kamali; J S Ng-Kamstra; M A Khan; L Knowlton; A J M Leather; I H Marks; J G Meara; M G Shrime; M Smith; K Søreide; T G Weiser; J Davies
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2018-12-20       Impact factor: 6.939

9.  Disparate Impacts of Two Public Reporting Initiatives on Clinical and Perceived Quality in Healthcare.

Authors:  Ahreum Han; Jongsun Park
Journal:  Risk Manag Healthc Policy       Date:  2021-12-15

10.  General practitioners' perceptions of public reporting of institution and individual medicine prescribing data.

Authors:  Xin Du; Xinping Zhang; Yuqing Tang
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2016-11-09       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.