The holy grail of surgical quality improvement

Process measures or risk-adjusted outcomes?

Selwyn O. Rogers

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Quality of care in surgery has garnered increased attention. Focus on the structure, processes of care, and use of risk-adjusted outcomes has offered different possible solutions. Volume-outcome studies have consistently demonstrated relationships between higher surgeon and hospital volume and favorable outcomes. The policy implications for quality improvement remain unclear. Recent efforts have focused on the use of risk-adjusted outcomes, such as the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, to drive quality improvement. Conversely, large efforts, mandated by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, have focused on process measures, such as perioperative complication prevention. For the future of surgical quality improvement, the combination of process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes are essential. It is only through the combined use of improved understanding of the relationship of processes of care and outcomes that we will make surgical care safer and improve quality.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1046-1050
Number of pages5
JournalThe American surgeon
Volume72
Issue number11
StatePublished - Nov 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Process Assessment (Health Care)
Quality Improvement
High-Volume Hospitals
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (U.S.)
Quality of Health Care
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery

Cite this

The holy grail of surgical quality improvement : Process measures or risk-adjusted outcomes? / Rogers, Selwyn O.

In: The American surgeon, Vol. 72, No. 11, 11.2006, p. 1046-1050.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9bfb160085fe48da84653ba6f783e2cd,
title = "The holy grail of surgical quality improvement: Process measures or risk-adjusted outcomes?",
abstract = "Quality of care in surgery has garnered increased attention. Focus on the structure, processes of care, and use of risk-adjusted outcomes has offered different possible solutions. Volume-outcome studies have consistently demonstrated relationships between higher surgeon and hospital volume and favorable outcomes. The policy implications for quality improvement remain unclear. Recent efforts have focused on the use of risk-adjusted outcomes, such as the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, to drive quality improvement. Conversely, large efforts, mandated by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, have focused on process measures, such as perioperative complication prevention. For the future of surgical quality improvement, the combination of process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes are essential. It is only through the combined use of improved understanding of the relationship of processes of care and outcomes that we will make surgical care safer and improve quality.",
author = "Rogers, {Selwyn O.}",
year = "2006",
month = "11",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "72",
pages = "1046--1050",
journal = "The American surgeon",
issn = "0003-1348",
publisher = "Southeastern Surgical Congress",
number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The holy grail of surgical quality improvement

T2 - Process measures or risk-adjusted outcomes?

AU - Rogers, Selwyn O.

PY - 2006/11

Y1 - 2006/11

N2 - Quality of care in surgery has garnered increased attention. Focus on the structure, processes of care, and use of risk-adjusted outcomes has offered different possible solutions. Volume-outcome studies have consistently demonstrated relationships between higher surgeon and hospital volume and favorable outcomes. The policy implications for quality improvement remain unclear. Recent efforts have focused on the use of risk-adjusted outcomes, such as the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, to drive quality improvement. Conversely, large efforts, mandated by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, have focused on process measures, such as perioperative complication prevention. For the future of surgical quality improvement, the combination of process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes are essential. It is only through the combined use of improved understanding of the relationship of processes of care and outcomes that we will make surgical care safer and improve quality.

AB - Quality of care in surgery has garnered increased attention. Focus on the structure, processes of care, and use of risk-adjusted outcomes has offered different possible solutions. Volume-outcome studies have consistently demonstrated relationships between higher surgeon and hospital volume and favorable outcomes. The policy implications for quality improvement remain unclear. Recent efforts have focused on the use of risk-adjusted outcomes, such as the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program, to drive quality improvement. Conversely, large efforts, mandated by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, have focused on process measures, such as perioperative complication prevention. For the future of surgical quality improvement, the combination of process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes are essential. It is only through the combined use of improved understanding of the relationship of processes of care and outcomes that we will make surgical care safer and improve quality.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34548618719&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34548618719&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 72

SP - 1046

EP - 1050

JO - The American surgeon

JF - The American surgeon

SN - 0003-1348

IS - 11

ER -