Literature DB >> 8044538

Variation in outcome of surgical procedures.

A Houghton1.   

Abstract

Evidence regarding the relationship between outcome and the number (volume) of patients treated at individual hospitals or by individual surgeons is reviewed and the interplay of other factors such as hospital characteristics, population profiles and referral preferences examined. An inverse relationship between mortality rate and hospital volume has repeatedly been found and, while there have been similar findings for surgeon volume, these results have been less consistent. What is certain is that wide variation in outcome does occur. What is less clear is whether the relationship to volume is a causal one or whether it is due to other factors such as those mentioned above. Despite there being a great deal that we do not understand about these relationships, considerable action has been taken as a result of the studies reported here, in the USA in particular. This has taken the form of rationalization of services, publication of hospital mortality rates and the setting of minimum numbers of specific procedures that should be performed each year by individual surgeons. Understanding of this area should be much greater before rationalization is considered in the name of higher quality and before mortality rates according to hospital or surgeon are published.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8044538     DOI: 10.1002/bjs.1800810508

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Surg        ISSN: 0007-1323            Impact factor:   6.939


  14 in total

1.  Reducing the risk of major elective surgery. Paper should have given details on causes of death.

Authors:  S Sudhindran
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-11-20

2.  Mortality control charts: assessment of outcome is complex.

Authors:  Frank A Frizelle; John Frye
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-06-21

3.  The registration of complications in surgery: a learning curve.

Authors:  Eelco J Veen; Maryska L G Janssen-Heijnen; Loek P H Leenen; Jan A Roukema
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 3.352

4.  Failure to rescue and mortality after reoperation for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

Authors:  Matthew W Mell; Amy Kind; Christie M Bartels; Maureen A Smith
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2011-04-17       Impact factor: 4.268

5.  "Practice makes perfect" is intuitive; the applicability of this axiom to surgical outcomes has been tenuous at best.

Authors:  T P Wade; F E Johnson
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  The duty of continuity.

Authors:  J Hill; P F Schofield
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  1998-02       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Does hospital mortality rate reflect quality of care on a surgical unit?

Authors:  D P O'Leary; R H Hardwick; E Cosford; A J Knox
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 1.891

8.  Surgeon volume versus morbidity and cost in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy in an academic community medical center.

Authors:  Timothy J Kennedy; Maria A Cassera; Ronald Wolf; Lee L Swanstrom; Paul D Hansen
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2010-07-30       Impact factor: 3.452

9.  Volume and outcome in coronary artery bypass graft surgery: true association or artefact?

Authors:  A J Sowden; J J Deeks; T A Sheldon
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1995-07-15

10.  Differences in operative mortality between high- and low-volume hospitals in Ontario for 5 major surgical procedures: estimating the number of lives potentially saved through regionalization.

Authors:  David R Urbach; Chaim M Bell; Peter C Austin
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2003-05-27       Impact factor: 8.262

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.