The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care
Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgic...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Khuri, Shukri F. [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2005 |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
National Surgical Quality Improvement Program |
|---|
| Anmerkung: |
© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: World Journal of Surgery - Springer-Verlag, 1996, 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:29 ; year:2005 ; number:10 ; day:15 ; month:09 ; pages:1222-1229 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
SPR003402614 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | SPR003402614 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230328135913.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 201001s2005 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)SPR003402614 | ||
| 035 | |a (SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Khuri, Shukri F. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 4 | |a The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2005 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 500 | |a © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Surgical Care |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a National Surgical Quality Improvement Program |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Volume Standard |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Automatic Interaction Detection |7 (dpeaa)DE-He213 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Henderson, William G. |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t World Journal of Surgery |d Springer-Verlag, 1996 |g 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 |w (DE-627)SPR003391159 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:29 |g year:2005 |g number:10 |g day:15 |g month:09 |g pages:1222-1229 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_A | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_SPRINGER | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 29 |j 2005 |e 10 |b 15 |c 09 |h 1222-1229 | ||
| author_variant |
s f k sf sfk w g h wg wgh |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
khurishukrifhendersonwilliamg:2005----:hcsaantouesmauefult |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2005 |
| publishDate |
2005 |
| allfields |
10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 doi (DE-627)SPR003402614 (SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Khuri, Shukri F. verfasserin aut The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care 2005 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Surgical Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Volume Standard (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database (dpeaa)DE-He213 Automatic Interaction Detection (dpeaa)DE-He213 Henderson, William G. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:29 year:2005 number:10 day:15 month:09 pages:1222-1229 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 29 2005 10 15 09 1222-1229 |
| spelling |
10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 doi (DE-627)SPR003402614 (SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Khuri, Shukri F. verfasserin aut The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care 2005 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Surgical Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Volume Standard (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database (dpeaa)DE-He213 Automatic Interaction Detection (dpeaa)DE-He213 Henderson, William G. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:29 year:2005 number:10 day:15 month:09 pages:1222-1229 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 29 2005 10 15 09 1222-1229 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 doi (DE-627)SPR003402614 (SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Khuri, Shukri F. verfasserin aut The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care 2005 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Surgical Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Volume Standard (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database (dpeaa)DE-He213 Automatic Interaction Detection (dpeaa)DE-He213 Henderson, William G. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:29 year:2005 number:10 day:15 month:09 pages:1222-1229 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 29 2005 10 15 09 1222-1229 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 doi (DE-627)SPR003402614 (SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Khuri, Shukri F. verfasserin aut The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care 2005 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Surgical Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Volume Standard (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database (dpeaa)DE-He213 Automatic Interaction Detection (dpeaa)DE-He213 Henderson, William G. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:29 year:2005 number:10 day:15 month:09 pages:1222-1229 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 29 2005 10 15 09 1222-1229 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 doi (DE-627)SPR003402614 (SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Khuri, Shukri F. verfasserin aut The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care 2005 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Surgical Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Volume Standard (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database (dpeaa)DE-He213 Automatic Interaction Detection (dpeaa)DE-He213 Henderson, William G. aut Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery Springer-Verlag, 1996 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 (DE-627)SPR003391159 nnns volume:29 year:2005 number:10 day:15 month:09 pages:1222-1229 https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 lizenzpflichtig Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER AR 29 2005 10 15 09 1222-1229 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 volume:29 year:2005 number:10 day:15 month:09 pages:1222-1229 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in World Journal of Surgery 29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229 volume:29 year:2005 number:10 day:15 month:09 pages:1222-1229 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Surgical Care National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Volume Standard National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database Automatic Interaction Detection |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Khuri, Shukri F. @@aut@@ Henderson, William G. @@aut@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2005-09-15T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
SPR003391159 |
| id |
SPR003402614 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR003402614</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230328135913.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2005 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR003402614</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Khuri, Shukri F.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Surgical Care</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">National Surgical Quality Improvement Program</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Volume Standard</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Automatic Interaction Detection</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Henderson, William G.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">World Journal of Surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR003391159</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:29</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2005</subfield><subfield code="g">number:10</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:09</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1222-1229</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">29</subfield><subfield code="j">2005</subfield><subfield code="e">10</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">09</subfield><subfield code="h">1222-1229</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Khuri, Shukri F. |
| spellingShingle |
Khuri, Shukri F. misc Surgical Care misc National Surgical Quality Improvement Program misc Volume Standard misc National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database misc Automatic Interaction Detection The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care |
| authorStr |
Khuri, Shukri F. |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)SPR003391159 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut aut |
| collection |
springer |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care Surgical Care (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (dpeaa)DE-He213 Volume Standard (dpeaa)DE-He213 National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database (dpeaa)DE-He213 Automatic Interaction Detection (dpeaa)DE-He213 |
| topic |
misc Surgical Care misc National Surgical Quality Improvement Program misc Volume Standard misc National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database misc Automatic Interaction Detection |
| topic_unstemmed |
misc Surgical Care misc National Surgical Quality Improvement Program misc Volume Standard misc National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database misc Automatic Interaction Detection |
| topic_browse |
misc Surgical Care misc National Surgical Quality Improvement Program misc Volume Standard misc National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database misc Automatic Interaction Detection |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
cr |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
SPR003391159 |
| hierarchy_top_title |
World Journal of Surgery |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)SPR003391159 |
| title |
The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)SPR003402614 (SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e |
| title_full |
The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care |
| author_sort |
Khuri, Shukri F. |
| journal |
World Journal of Surgery |
| journalStr |
World Journal of Surgery |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2005 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
txt |
| container_start_page |
1222 |
| author_browse |
Khuri, Shukri F. Henderson, William G. |
| container_volume |
29 |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Khuri, Shukri F. |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 |
| title_sort |
case against volume as a measure of quality of surgical care |
| title_auth |
The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care |
| abstract |
Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 |
| abstractGer |
Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 |
| abstract_unstemmed |
Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. © Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005 |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_SPRINGER |
| container_issue |
10 |
| title_short |
The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care |
| url |
https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Henderson, William G. |
| author2Str |
Henderson, William G. |
| ppnlink |
SPR003391159 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
c |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| doi_str |
10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6 |
| up_date |
2024-07-03T19:19:52.792Z |
| _version_ |
1803586783464652800 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">SPR003402614</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230328135913.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">201001s2005 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)SPR003402614</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(SPR)s00268-005-7987-6-e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Khuri, Shukri F.</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The Case Against Volume as a Measure of Quality of Surgical Care</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="500" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">© Société Internationale de Chirurgie 2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Healthcare purchasers, represented by the Leapfrog Group, have attempted to set standards for “quality” of surgical care that include a minimum volume for each of five major surgical procedures, with the assumption that higher volumes in surgery bring better outcomes. The VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) is a validated, outcome-based program that prospectively collects clinical data on all major surgical operations in the VA, and builds validated risk-adjustment models that generate, for each hospital and each surgical specialty within a hospital, risk-adjusted outcomes expressed as O/E (observed to expected) ratios for 30-day mortality and morbidity. The O/E ratio has been validated as a reliable comparative measure of the quality of surgical care. Unlike retrospective studies that are based on administrative databases, NSQIP studies have failed to demonstrate a direct relationship between volume and risk-adjusted outcomes of surgery across various specialties. These studies have emphasized that the quality of systems of care was more important than volume in determining the overall quality of surgical care at an institution. High-volume hospitals could still deliver poor care in as much as low-volume hospitals could deliver good care. NSQIP studies have also underscored the major limitations of claims data and administrative databases in the provision of adequate risk-adjustment models that are crucial for volume–outcome studies. Therefore, volume should not be substituted for prospectively monitored and properly risk-adjusted outcomes as a comparative measure of the quality of surgical care.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Surgical Care</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">National Surgical Quality Improvement Program</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Volume Standard</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Database</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Automatic Interaction Detection</subfield><subfield code="7">(dpeaa)DE-He213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Henderson, William G.</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="t">World Journal of Surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">Springer-Verlag, 1996</subfield><subfield code="g">29(2005), 10 vom: 15. Sept., Seite 1222-1229</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)SPR003391159</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:29</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2005</subfield><subfield code="g">number:10</subfield><subfield code="g">day:15</subfield><subfield code="g">month:09</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:1222-1229</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7987-6</subfield><subfield code="z">lizenzpflichtig</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_SPRINGER</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">29</subfield><subfield code="j">2005</subfield><subfield code="e">10</subfield><subfield code="b">15</subfield><subfield code="c">09</subfield><subfield code="h">1222-1229</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.398883 |