TITLE

Linking Processes and Outcomes to Improve Surgical Performance: A New Approach to Morbidity and Mortality Peer Review

AUTHOR(S)
Pine, Michael; Fry, Donald E.
PUB. DATE
November 2006
SOURCE
American Surgeon;Nov2006, Vol. 72 Issue 11, p1115
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
Peer review of surgical cases resulting in death or potentially avoidable complications is a longstanding tradition, but intensive reviews of individual cases rarely produces tangible improvements in clinical outcomes. The systematic comparison of care received by patients who experienced adverse outcomes to care received by patients who had uneventful surgical courses is a promising alternative to intensive case review. However, the results of these studies may be misleading because physicians often choose interventions based on their perceptions of patients' preoperative risks, and higher adverse outcome rates among patients with higher preoperative risk may distort comparisons of alternative interventions. The creation of a control sample by carefully matching each patient who experienced an adverse outcome to a patient who had a similar preoperative risk but did not experience an adverse outcome can overcome this problem and provide excellent insight into how to improve clinical performance most effectively and efficiently. By using currently available electronic data to compute each patient's risk of an adverse outcome, a series of cases with adverse outcomes can be matched to an equal number of controls. Peer review committees can then direct focused data collection and analyses of potentially critical processes of care to determine which, if any, are associated with significantly poorer clinical results. A simulated scenario is analyzed in detail to illustrate the ability of this technique to correctly determine best practices when other approaches fail to do so.
ACCESSION #
23041982

 

Related Articles

  • Building a framework for trust: critical event analysis of deaths in surgical care. Thompson, A. M.; Stonebridge, P. A. // BMJ: British Medical Journal (International Edition);5/14/2005, Vol. 330 Issue 7500, p1139 

    Focuses on the decline of people's confidence in clinicians and health care institutions and efforts to counteract the lack of confidence. Need for clinicians to show that effective mechanisms exist for assessing deaths; Details of the Scottish Audit of Surgical Mortality (SASM), a nation system...

  • Involving patients in clinical research. Lockwood, Sue // BMJ: British Medical Journal (International Edition);09/18/99, Vol. 319 Issue 7212, p724 

    Deals with the involvement of patients in clinical research and its implication on the quality of research. Qualifications of patients; Programs of the United States and Australia for the involvement of patients in clinical research; Successful research partnerships in the Unites States;...

  • Hospitals Make War on Doctors, Says Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.  // Biomedical Market Newsletter;4/14/2011, p28 

    The article focuses on the hospitals which prioritize having more revenue obtained from the government. It mentions that physicians are considered as hospital employees and business venture partners of hospitals because they accomplish profitable medical procedures. It says that independent...

  • Meeting more explicit peer review imperatives. Spath, Patrice // Hospital Peer Review;Aug2007, Vol. 32 Issue 8, p111 

    The article focuses on the 2007 U.S. Joint Commission (TJC) Medical Staff Standards which reinforce the need for an ongoing, objective, and fact-based process for physician peer review.

  • Avoid charges that peer review is malicious.  // Hospital Peer Review;Sep2008, Vol. 33 Issue 9, p123 

    The article discusses how hospitals can avoid charges that their peer review of medical staff is malicious.

  • Clinical peer review: burnishing a tarnished icon. Dans, Peter E.; Dans, P E // Annals of Internal Medicine;4/1/93, Vol. 118 Issue 7, p566 

    States that peer review using implicit criteria is useful when judging groups of patients. Prescriptions to improve peer review of the quality of care.

  • A question of trust. Sayburn, Anna // Update;1/20/2005, Vol. 70 Issue 1, p7 

    The article presents the first issue of "Update" for 2005. This is started the year with a couple of brand new series: Summerton on the Art of Diagnosis and Garwood on Ethics and Medical Law. Both demonstrate the centrality of trust in the doctor-patient relationship. Doctors are probably more...

  • Teaching Clinical Performance Examination Using Action Learning Techniques. Kyung Hye Park; Woo Jeong Kim // Korean Journal of Medical Education;Mar2012, Vol. 24 Issue 1, p23 

    Purpose: Action learning is an educational method, whereby participants study their own actions and experiences to improve performance. We aimed to study the effects and share the experiences with action learning to teach clinical performance examination (CPX). Methods: Twenty-eight fourth-year...

  • How peer review reduced GP referrals by 25% in two months. Cooper, Ruth; Sunney, Wendy // Pulse;3/21/2012, Vol. 72 Issue 10, p31 

    The article offers the authors' insights on the help that the internal referral management gave their clinical commissioning group (CCG) to reduce costs per patients with care improvement. The authors state that they have recognised that internal peer review across the CCG could reduce their...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics