How do you know if you are any good? A surgeon performance feedback system for the outcomes of radical prostatectomy

European Urology

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 284-289

  Vickers, Andrew J ^a   Sjoberg, Daniel ^a   Basch, Ethan ^a   Sculli, Frank ^a   Shouery, Marwan ^a   Laudone, Vincent ^a   Touijer, Karim ^a   Eastham, James ^a   Scardino, Peter T ^a  

^a MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BLOOD VOLUME; CONFIDENTIALITY; CREDIBILITY; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; INTERNET; LENGTH OF STAY; LIFE EXPECTANCY; MEDICAL PARAMETERS; ONLINE MONITORING; OPERATION DURATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SELECTION; PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT SYSTEM; PERIOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROCESS DESIGN; PROSTATECTOMY; RECURRENCE RISK; REVIEW; SURGEON PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK SYSTEM; THEORY-PRACTICE RELATIONSHIP; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 83955165409     PISSN: 03022838     EISSN: 18737560     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2011.10.039     Document Type: Editorial

References (15)

1. C.B. Begg, E.R. Riedel, and P.B. Bach Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy N Engl J Med 346 2002 1138 1144
2. A.J. Vickers, F.J. Bianco, and A.M. Serio The surgical learning curve for prostate cancer control after radical prostatectomy J Natl Cancer Inst 99 2007 1171 1177
3. A.J. Vickers, C.J. Savage, and M. Hruza The surgical learning curve for laparoscopic radical prostatectomy: a retrospective cohort study Lancet Oncol 10 2009 475 480
4. F.J. Bianco Jr., A.J. Vickers, and A.M. Cronin Variations among experienced surgeons in cancer control after open radical prostatectomy J Urol 183 2010 977 982
5. A. Vickers, C. Savage, and F. Bianco Cancer control and functional outcomes after radical prostatectomy as markers of surgical quality: analysis of heterogeneity between surgeons at a single cancer center Eur Urol 59 2011 317 322
6. J.P. Mulhall Defining and reporting erectile function outcomes after radical prostatectomy: challenges and misconceptions J Urol 181 2009 462 471
7. E.D. Peterson Optimizing the science of quality improvement JAMA 294 2005 369 371
8. E.H. Bradley, E.S. Holmboe, J.A. Mattera, S.A. Roumanis, M.J. Radford, and H.M. Krumholz Data feedback efforts in quality improvement: lessons learned from US hospitals Qual Saf Health Care 13 2004 26 31
9. E.H. Bradley, E.S. Holmboe, J.A. Mattera, S.A. Roumanis, M.J. Radford, and H.M. Krumholz A qualitative study of increasing beta-blocker use after myocardial infarction: why do some hospitals succeed? JAMA 285 2001 2604 2611
10. A. Vickers, and J. Eastham What has to happen before we report radical prostatectomy outcomes of individual surgeons to the public? Urol Oncol 29 2011 118 123
11. C.R. Narins, A.M. Dozier, F.S. Ling, and W. Zareba The influence of public reporting of outcome data on medical decision making by physicians Arch Intern Med 165 2005 83 87
12. E. Basch, D. Artz, and D. Dulko Patient online self-reporting of toxicity symptoms during chemotherapy J Clin Oncol 23 2005 3552 3561
13. E. Basch, A. Iasonos, and A. Barz Long-term toxicity monitoring via electronic patient-reported outcomes in patients receiving chemotherapy J Clin Oncol 25 2007 5374 5380
14. E. Basch, D. Artz, and A. Iasonos Evaluation of an online platform for cancer patient self-reporting of chemotherapy toxicities J Am Med Inform Assoc 14 2007 264 268
15. A.J. Vickers, C.J. Savage, M. Shouery, J.A. Eastham, P.T. Scardino, and E.M. Basch Validation study of a Web-based assessment of functional recovery after radical prostatectomy Health Qual Life Outcomes 8 2010 82