Could sequential individual peer reviewed mortality audit data be used in appraisal?

Surgeon

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 288-292

  Thompson, A M ^a,b   Ritchie, W ^b   Stonebridge, P A ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

^b ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS AND SURGEONS OF GLASGOW   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF DUNDEE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Appraisal; Mortality; Surgical audit

Indexed keywords

CHI SQUARE DISTRIBUTION; COMPETENCE; CONTROLLED STUDY; GOOD CLINICAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HUMAN; INDIVIDUALITY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MANAGED CARE; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICAL RECORD; PEER REVIEW; POSTOPERATIVE HEMORRHAGE; REVIEW; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; SURGEON; SURGICAL ERROR; SURGICAL MORTALITY; UNITED KINGDOM; VALIDATION PROCESS;

EID: 22944482815     PISSN: 1479666X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S1479-666X(05)80094-0     Document Type: Review

References (8)

1. Department of Health. An organisation with a memory; report of an expert group on learning from adverse events in the NHS. London, The Stationery Office, 2000. ISBN 0113224419.
2. Carter D. The surgeon as a risk factor. BMJ 2003; 326:832-33.
3. Zhan C, Miller MR. Excess length of stay, charges and mortality attributable to medical injuries during hospitalisation. JAMA 2003;290:1868-74.
4. Gray CJG, Hoile RW, Ingram GS, Sherry KM. The report of the national confidential enquiry into perioperative deaths 1996/1997 London 1998 ISBN 0952206951.
5. Thompson AM, Stonebridge PA. Building a framework for trust: critical event analysis of deaths in surgical care. BMJ 2005; 330:1139-42.
6. Bridgewater B. Mortality data in adult cardiac surgery for named surgeons: retrospective examination of prospectively collected data on coronary artery surgery and aortic valve replacement. BMJ 2005;330:506-10.
7. Sarker SK. Courses, cadavers and counsellors: reducing errors in the operating theatre. BMJ 2003;327:s109.
8. Reason J. Human error: models and management. BMJ 2000;320:768-70.