Complexity- and risk-adjusted model for measuring surgical outcome

British Journal of Surgery

Volumn 86, Issue 12, 1999, Pages 1567-1572

  Pillai, S B ^a   Van Rij, A M ^a   Williams, S ^a   Thomson, I A ^a   Putterill, M J ^a   Greig, S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO   (New Zealand)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; HOSPITAL PATIENT; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MEDICAL AUDIT; MODEL; MORBIDITY; OPERATION DURATION; ORGAN; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATION; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROFESSIONAL STANDARD; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SCORING SYSTEM; SURGERY;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFANT; INFANT, NEWBORN; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MIDDLE AGED; ODDS RATIO; PROGNOSIS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, OPERATIVE;

EID: 0032796281     PISSN: 00071323     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2168.1999.01286.x     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. 1 Sagar PM, Hartley MN, Mancey-Jones B, Sedman PC, May J, Macfie J. Comparative audit of colorectal resection with the POSSUM scoring system. Br J Surg 1994; 81: 1492-4.
2. 2 Murray GD, Hayes C, Fowler S, Dunn DC. Presentation of comparative audit data. Br J Surg 1995; 82: 329-32.
3. 3 Lyons C, Gumpert R. Medical audit data: counting is not enough. BMJ 1990; 300: 1563-6.
4. 4 Copeland GP. Comparative audit: fact versus fantasy. Br J Surg 1993; 80: 1424-5.
5. 5 Toybee P. Nervous surgeons' best kept secrets: their rate of success. Daily Mail. 19 November 1991: 5.
6. 6 Berwick DM. The double edge of knowledge. JAMA 1991; 266: 841-2 (Editorial).
7. 7 Copeland GP, Jones D, Walters M. POSSUM: a scoring system for surgical audit. Br J Surg 1991; 78: 355-60.
8. 8 Grover FL, Johnson RR, Shroyer LW, Marshall G, Hammermeister KE. The Veterans Affairs Continuous Improvement in Cardiac Surgery Study. Ann Thorac Surg 1994; 58: 1845-51.
9. 9 Jones DR, Copeland GP, de Cossart L. Comparison of POSSUM with APACHE II for prediction of outcome from a surgical high dependency unit. Br J Surg 1992; 79: 1293-6.
10. 10 Blumberg MS. Comments on HCFA hospital death rate statistical outliers. Health Care Financing Administration. Health Serv Res 1987; 21: 715-39.
11. 11 Rowan KM, Kerr JH, Major E, McPherson K, Short A, Vessey MP. Intensive Care Society's APACHE II study in Britain and Ireland-II. Outcome comparisons of intensive care units after adjustment for case mix hy the American APACHE II method. BMJ 1993; 307: 977-81.
12. 12 Department of Surgery Clinical Audit Research Unit. The Otago Audit System: Codes for Surgical Audit (General/Vascular) 1996 Revision. Dunedin: University of Otago, 1996.
13. 13 Peters T, Golding J. Assessing risk adjustment. In: Milunsky A, Friedman EA, Gluck L, eds. Advances in Perinatal Medicine. New York: Plenum, 1985: 235-66.
14. 14 Lemeshow S, Hosmer DW Jr. A review of goodness of fit statistics for use in the development of logistic regression models. Am J Epidemiol 1982; 115: 92-106.
15. 15 Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology 1982; 143: 29-36.
16. 16 Metz CE. Basic principles of ROC analysis. Semin Nucl Med 1978; 8: 283-98.
17. 17 Hanley JA, McNeil BJ. A method of comparing the areas under receiver operating characteristic curves derived from the same cases. Radiology 1983; 148: 839-43.
18. 18 Spiegelhalter DJ, Knill-Jones RP. Statistical and knowledge based approaches to clinical decision-support systems, with an application in gastroenterology. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society A 1984; 14: 489-515.