Cindy Ou1, Michaela Rektorysova1, Bushra Othman2, John A Windsor1,3, Sanjay Pandanaboyana4, Benjamin P T Loveday5,6,7. 1. Department of Surgery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. 2. Department of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. 3. Department of Surgery, Auckland District Health Board, Auckland, New Zealand. 4. HPB and Transplant Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle, Upon Tyne, UK. 5. Department of Surgery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. Ben.Loveday@petermac.org. 6. Department of Surgical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. Ben.Loveday@petermac.org. 7. Department of Surgery, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia. Ben.Loveday@petermac.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic surgery is performed in relatively few centres. There are validated quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery, although it remains unclear how published benchmarks compare with each other. This study aimed to systematically review published literature to summarise metrics that define quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery. METHOD: A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL was undertaken until June 2019. Articles that developed or validated published quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery were included. Benchmarks were classified into three domains using the Donabedian framework, and their quality assessed using the AIRE Instrument. RESULTS: Nineteen studies included 55 quality metrics, of which 8 developed new metrics, and 11 studies validated previously published metrics. The methodology of metric development was either expert opinion-driven or data-driven. All metrics demonstrated moderate quality scores. There was partial agreement in some metrics (e.g. < 10 h total operative duration), but lack of consensus for most others (e.g. lymph node yield ≥ 10, ≥ 12, ≥ 15, ≥ 16). No metrics related to patient reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Published quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery predominantly arise from eight studies, with heterogeneity in how the metrics were developed. There was not consensus for all metrics. Metrics need to be reviewed as new data emerge, technologies develop and opinions change.
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic surgery is performed in relatively few centres. There are validated quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery, although it remains unclear how published benchmarks compare with each other. This study aimed to systematically review published literature to summarise metrics that define quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery. METHOD: A search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL was undertaken until June 2019. Articles that developed or validated published quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery were included. Benchmarks were classified into three domains using the Donabedian framework, and their quality assessed using the AIRE Instrument. RESULTS: Nineteen studies included 55 quality metrics, of which 8 developed new metrics, and 11 studies validated previously published metrics. The methodology of metric development was either expert opinion-driven or data-driven. All metrics demonstrated moderate quality scores. There was partial agreement in some metrics (e.g. < 10 h total operative duration), but lack of consensus for most others (e.g. lymph node yield ≥ 10, ≥ 12, ≥ 15, ≥ 16). No metrics related to patient reported outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Published quality benchmarks for pancreatic surgery predominantly arise from eight studies, with heterogeneity in how the metrics were developed. There was not consensus for all metrics. Metrics need to be reviewed as new data emerge, technologies develop and opinions change.
Authors: Elizabeth A Burmeister; Dianne L O'Connell; Susan J Jordan; David Goldstein; Neil Merrett; David K Wyld; Vanessa L Beesley; Helen M Gooden; Monika Janda; Rachel E Neale Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2016-11-21 Impact factor: 7.738