Effect of panel composition on physician ratings of appropriateness of abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: Elucidating differences between multispecialty panel results and specialty society recommendations

Health Policy

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 67-81

  Herrin, Jeph ^a,b   Etchason, Jeff A ^a,b,c   Kahan, James P ^d   Brook, Robert H ^d,e   Ballard, David J ^a,b  

^a Kerr L White Inst Hlth Serv Res   (United States)

^b EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c ATLANTA VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^d RAND CORPORATION   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Appropriateness of care; Expert panels; Practice guidelines; Specialists

Indexed keywords

ABDOMINAL AORTA ANEURYSM; ARTICLE; MANAGEMENT; MEDICAL SPECIALIST; NONHUMAN; PHYSICIAN; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; SOCIETY; UNITED STATES;

AORTIC ANEURYSM, ABDOMINAL; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT CONFERENCES; DECISION MAKING; GROUP PROCESSES; HUMANS; PEER REVIEW, HEALTH CARE; PRACTICE GUIDELINES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; SPECIALTIES, MEDICAL; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0030827832     PISSN: 01688510     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0168-8510(97)00055-9     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Kahan JP, Bernstein SJ, Leape LL, Hilborne LH, Park RE, Parker L, Kamberg CJ, Brook RH Measuring the necessity of medical procedures. Med Care. 32:1994;357-365.
2. Audet AM, Greenfield S, Field M Medical practice guidelines: current activities and future directions. Ann Intern Med. 113:1990;709-714.
3. Brook RH, Chassin MR, Fink A, Solomon DH, Kosecoff J, Park RE A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2:1986;53-63.
4. Ballard DJ, Etchason JA, Hilborne LH, Kamberg C, Solomon D, Leape LL et al. Abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: a literature review and ratings of appropriateness and necessity. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation, 1992.
5. Phelps CE The methodologic foundations of studies of the appropriateness of medical care. New Engl J Med. 329:1993;1241-1245.
6. Brook RH Practice guidelines and practicing medicine: Are they compatible? J Am Med Assoc. 262:1989;3027-3030.
7. Bernstein SJ, Hilborne LH, Leape LL, Fiske ME, Park RE, Kamberg CJ, Brook RH The appropriateness of use of coronary angiography in New York State. J Am Med Assoc. 269:1993;766-769.
8. Hilborne LH, Leape LL, Bernstein SJ, Park RE, Fiske M.E., Kamberg CJet al. The appropriateness of use of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in New York State. J Am Med Assoc. 269:1993;761-765.
9. Leape LL, Hilborne LH, Park RE, Bernstein SJ, Kamberg CJ, Sherwood M, Brook RH The appropriateness of use of coronary artery bypass graft surgery in New York State. J Am Med Assoc. 269:1993;753-760.
10. Leape LL, Park RE, Kahan JP, Brook RH Group judgments of appropriateness: the effect of panel composition. Qual Assurance Health Care. 4:1992;151-159.
11. Matchar DB, Goldstein LB, McCrory DC, Oddone EZ, Jansen DA, Hilborne LH, Park RE. Carotid endarterectomy: a literature review and ratings of appropriateness and necessity. Santa Monica, CA: The RAND Corporation, 1992.
12. Park RE, Fink A, Brook RH, Chassin MR, Kahn KL, Merrick Net al. Physician ratings of appropriate indications for six medical and surgical procedures. Am J Public Health. 76:1986;766-772.
13. Oddone EZ, Samsa G, Matchar DB Global judgments versus decision-model-facilitated judgments: are experts internally consistent? Med Decis Mak. 14:1994;19-26.
14. Scott EA, Black N Appropriateness of cholecystectomy in the United Kingdom - a consensus panel approach. Gut. 32:1991;1066-1070.
15. Fraser GM, Pilpel JK, Kosecoff J, Brook RH Effect of panel composition on appropriateness ratings. Int J Qual Health Care. 6:1994;251-255.
16. Kahan JP, Park RE, Leape LL, Bernstein SJ, Hilborne LH, Parker Let al. Variations by specialty in physician ratings of the appropriateness and necessity of indications for procedures. Med Care. 34:1996;512-523.
17. Hollier LH, Taylor LM, Ochsner J Recommended indications for operative treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysms: report of a subcommittee of the Joint Council of the Society for Vascular Surgery and the North American Chapter of the International Society for Cardiovascular Surgery. J Vasc Surg. 15:1992;1046-1056.
18. Stata Corporation. Stata Reference Manual, release 3.1. vols. 1-3. 6th ed. College Station, (TX): Stata Corporation, 1993.
19. Hicks NR Some observations on attempts to measure appropriateness of care. Br Med J. 309:1994;730-733.
20. Lederle FA Risk of rupture of large abdominal aortic aneurysms. Arch Intern Med. 156:1996;1007-1009.
21. Powell JT, Wilson SE, Johnson GR, Littooy FN, Acher C, Messina LMet al. Design of the abdominal aortic aneurys detection and management study. J Vasc Surg. 20:1994;296-303.
22. Powell JT, Greenhalgh RM, Ruckley CV, Fowkes FGR The UK small aneurysm trial. Ann New York Acad Sci. 800:1996;249-251.
23. UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants. The UK small aneurysm trial: design, methods and progress. Eur J Endovasc Surg 1995;9:42-48.