Case-mix and the use of control charts in monitoring mortality rates after coronary artery bypass

BMC Health Services Research

Volumn 7, Issue , 2007, Pages

  Marshall, Tom ^a   Mohammed, Mohammed A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BIRMINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CASE MIX; CAUSE OF DEATH; CONFIDENCE INTERVAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS GRAFT; DATA ANALYSIS; HOSPITAL; HUMAN; KAPPA STATISTICS; LONGITUDINAL STUDY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MEDICAL RECORD REVIEW; OBSERVATIONAL METHOD; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT MONITORING; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURGICAL RISK; UNITED STATES; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; DIAGNOSIS RELATED GROUP; MEDICAL RECORD; MORTALITY; MULTICENTER STUDY;

CORONARY ARTERY BYPASS; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; DIAGNOSIS-RELATED GROUPS; HOSPITAL MORTALITY; HUMANS; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MEDICAL RECORDS; MULTICENTER STUDIES; NEW YORK;

EID: 34248369432     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14726963     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-63     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Trends in admissions and deaths in English NHS hospitals. B Jarman P Aylin A Bottle, British Medical Journal 2004 328 855 15073069 10.1136/bmj.328.7444.855
2. Systematic analysis of in-patients' circumstances and causes of death: a tool to improve quality of care. C Beguin FR France J Ninane, International Journal for Quality in Health Care 1997 9 6 427 33 10.1093/intqhc/9.6.427 9466178
3. th August 2004]
4. Fair comparison of mortality data following cardiac surgery. R Ecochard G De Gevigney C Colin, Heart 2000 84 1 5 6 10.1136/heart.84.1.5 10862573
5. Achieving and sustaining improved quality: lessons from New York State and cardiac surgery. MR Chassin, Health Affairs 2002 21 4 40 51 10.1377/hlthaff.21.4.40 12117152
6. Performance league tables: the NHS deserves better. P Adab AM Rouse MA Mohammed T Marshall, British Medical Journal 2002 324 95 98 11786455 10.1136/bmj.324.7339.S95
7. Judging hospitals by severity-adjusted mortality rates: The case of CABG surgery. B Landon LI Iezzoni AS Ash, Inquiry 1996 33 155 166 8675279
8. North West Quality Improvement Programme in Cardiac Interventions. Surgeon specific mortality in adult cardiac surgery: comparison between crude and risk stratified data. B Bridgewater AD Grayson M Jackson N Brooks GJ Grotte DJ Keenan R Millner BM Fabri M Jones, British Medical Journal 2003 327 7405 13 7 12842949 10.1136/bmj.327.7405.13
9. The risks of risk adjustment. LI Iezzoni, Journal of the American Medical Association 1997 278 19 1600 07 10.1001/jama.278.19.1600 9370507
10. Cardiac surgery report cards: comprehensive review and statistical critique. DM Shahian SL Normand DF Torchiana SM Lewis JO Pastore RE Kuntz PI Dreyer, Annals of Thoracic Surgery 2001 72 6 2155 68 10.1016/S0003-4975(01) 03222-2 11789828
11. An evaluation of existing risk stratification models as a tool for comparison of surgical performances for coronary artery bypass grafting between institutions. G Asimakopoulos S Al-Ruzzeh G Ambler RZ Omar P Punjabi M Amrani KM Taylor, European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery 2003 23 6 935 41 10.1016/S1010-7940(03)00165-9 12829069
12. Comparative analysis of risk-adjusted bypass surgery stratification models in a community hospital. JF Reed 3rd SA Olenchock Jr, Heart & Lung 2003 32 6 383 90 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2003.08.001 14652530
13. Clinical versus administrative databases for CABG surgery. Does it matter? EL Hannan H Kilburn Jr ML Lindsey R Lewis, Medical Care 1992 30 10 892 907 10.1097/00005650-199210000-00002 1405795
14. Risk adjustment for coronary artery bypass graft surgery: an administrative approach versus EuroSCORE. C Ugolini L Nobilio, International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2004 16 2 157 64 10.1093/intqhc/mzh016 15051710
15. "Use and misuse of process and outcome data in managing performance of acute medical care: avoiding institutional stigma.". RJ Lilford MA Mohammed D Spiegelhalter R Thomson, The Lancet 2004 363 1147 54 10.1016/S0140-6736(04)15901-1
16. Economic Control of Quality of Manufactured Product. WA Shewhart, D Van Nostrand Company New York, 1931. Reprint in 1980 by the ASQC Quality Press
17. Differences in clinical performance. T Marshall MA Mohammed, British Journal of Surgery 2002 8 98 1 3
18. Properties of the cumulative risk-adjusted mortality (CRAM) chart, including the number of deaths before a doubling of the death rate is detected. C Sismanidis M Bland J Poloniecki, Medical Decision Making 2003 23 3 242 51 10.1177/0272989X03023003006 12809322
19. Bristol Shipman, and clinical governance: Shewhart's forgotten lessons. MA Mohammed KK Cheng A Rouse T Marshall, Lancet 2001 357 463 467 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04019-8 11273083
20. Monitoring the results of cardiac surgery by variable life-adjusted display. J Lovegrove O Valencia T Treasure C Sherlaw-Johnson S Gallivan, Lancet 1997 350 9085 1128 30 10.1016/S0140-6736(97)06507-0 9343500
21. Cardiovascular Reports. New York State Department of Health, http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/heart/heart_disease.htm Last accessed 28th February 2006
22. Comparing outcomes of coronary artery bypass surgery: Is the New York Cardiac Surgery Reporting System model sensitive to changes in case mix? LG Glance TM Osler, Critical Care Medicine 2001 29 11 2090 6 10.1097/00003246- 200111000-00008 11700401
23. Improving health care with control charts. RG Carey, Basic and advanced SPC methods and case studies ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 2003
24. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. J Cohen, Educational and Psychological Measurement 1960 20 37 46 10.1177/001316446002000104
25. The Shewhart Control Chart-Tests for Special Causes. S Nelson Lloyd, Journal of Quality Technology 1984 16 4 237 239
26. The unintended consequences of publicly reporting quality information. RM Werner DA Asch, Journal of the American Medical Association 2005 293 10 1239 44 10.1001/jama.293.10.1239 15755946
27. International Stroke Trial Collaborative Group. European Carotid Surgery Trial Collaborative Group. Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies. JJ Deeks J Dinnes R D'Amico AJ Sowden C Sakarovitch F Song M Petticrew DG Altman, Health Technology Assessment (Winchester, England) 2003 7 27 iii x 1-173 14499048