Affiliation:
1. Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
2. Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
Abstract
National and institutional quality initiatives provide benchmarks for evaluating the effectiveness of medical care. However, the dramatic growth in the number and type of medical and organizational quality-improvement standards creates a challenge to identify and understand those that most accurately determine quality in cardiac surgery. It is important that surgeons have knowledge and insight into valid, useful indicators for comparison and improvement. We therefore reviewed the medical literature and have identified improvement initiatives focused on cardiac surgery. We discuss the benefits and drawbacks of existing methodologies, such as comprehensive regional and national databases that aid self-evaluation and feedback, volume-based standards as structural indicators, process measurements arising from evidence-based research, and risk-adjusted outcomes. In addition, we discuss the potential of newer methods, such as patient-reported outcomes and composite measurements that combine data from multiple sources.
Publisher
Texas Heart Institute Journal
Subject
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Reference77 articles.
1. The classic: a study in hospital efficiency: as demonstrated by the case report of first five years of private hospital [classical article];Codman;Clin Orthop Relat Res,2013
2. Evaluating the quality of medical care;Donabedian;Milbank Q,2005
3. To err is human: building a safer health system;Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Quality of Health Care in America.,2000
4. Comments on HCFA hospital death rate statistical outliers;Blumberg;Health Care Financing Administration. Health Serv Res,1987
5. Initial report of the Veterans Administration Preoperative Risk Assessment Study for Cardiac Surgery;Grover;Ann Thorac Surg,1990
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献