Anesthesiologist Board Certification and Patient Outcomes

Author:

Silber Jeffrey H.1,Kennedy Sean K.2,Even-Shoshan Orit3,Chen Wei4,Mosher Rachel E.5,Showan Ann M.6,Longnecker David E.7

Affiliation:

1. Associate Professor and Director, Center for Outcomes Research, Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and Associate Professor, Departments of Pediatrics and Anesthesia, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Department of Health Care Systems, The Wharton School and The Leonard Davis Institute of Health Original Investigations, Th

2. Associate Professor.

3. Associate Director, Center for Outcomes Research, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, and The Wharton School and The Leonard Davis Institute of Health Original Investigations, The University of Pennsylvania.

4. Director, Data Management and Computing.

5. Research Analyst, Center for Outcomes Research, The Children's Hospital of Philadelphia.

6. Assistant Professor.

7. Robert Dunning Dripps Professor and Chair, Department of Anesthesia, The University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

Abstract

Background Board certification is often used as a surrogate indicator of provider competence, although few outcome studies have demonstrated its validity. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent surgical procedures under the care of an anesthesiologist with or without board certification. Methods Medicare claims records for 144,883 patients in Pennsylvania who underwent general surgical or orthopedic procedures between 1991 and 1994 were used to determine provider-specific outcome rates adjusted to account for patient severity and case mix, and hospital characteristics. Outcomes of 8,894 cases involving midcareer anesthesiologists, 11-25 yr from medical school graduation, who lacked board certification were compared with all other cases. Midcareer anesthesiologist cases were studied because this group had sufficient time to become certified during an era when obtaining certification was already considered important, and consequently had the highest rate of board certification. Mortality within 30 days of admission and the failure-to-rescue rate (defined as the rate of death after an in-hospital complication) were the two primary outcome measures. Results Adjusted odds ratios for death and failure to rescue were greater when care was delivered by noncertified midcareer anesthesiologists (death = 1.13 [95% confidence interval, 1.00, 1.26], P < 0.04; failure to rescue = 1.13 [95% confidence interval, 1.01, 1.27], P < 0.04). Adjusting for international medical school graduates did not change these results. Conclusions When anesthesiology board certification is very common, as in midcareer practitioners, the lack of board certification is associated with worse outcomes. However, the poor outcomes associated with noncertified providers may be a result of the hospitals at which they practice and not necessarily their manner of practice.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Reference33 articles.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3