Program-specific reports: Implications and impact on program behavior

Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation

Volumn 18, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 210-215

  Vanwagner, Lisa B ^a   Skaro, Anton I ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

OPTN; Organ transplantation; Quality improvement; Risk assessment; SRTR

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIOR; CASE MIX; GRAFT RECIPIENT; HEALTH CARE FINANCING; HEALTH CARE MANAGEMENT; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION; PROGRAM SPECIFIC REPORT; REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT;

EVALUATION STUDIES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUALITY ASSURANCE, HEALTH CARE; REGISTRIES; RESEARCH REPORT; RISK ASSESSMENT; SURGICENTERS;

EID: 84875404355     PISSN: 10872418     EISSN: 15317013     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MOT.0b013e32835f07f8     Document Type: Review

References (27)

1. Kasiske BL, McBride MA, Cornell DL, et al. Report of a consensus conference on transplant program quality and surveillance. Am J Transplant 2012;12: 1988-1996
2. National Organ Transplantation Act. In: 98th United States of America Congress, Washington DC, USA; 1984
3. The SRTR Final Rule. In: Department Of Health And Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Federal Register, Final Rule, 42 CFR Part 121, Washington DC, USA; 1999. p. 21
4. Dickinson DM, Arrington CJ, Fant G, et al. SRTR program-specific reports on outcomes: A guide for the new reader. Am J Transplant 2008;8: 1012- 1026
5. McDiarmid SV, Pruett TL, Graham WK. The oversight of solid organ transplantation in the United States. Am J Transplant 2008;8: 739-744
6. Abecassis MM, Burke R, Cosimi AB, et al. Transplant center regulations - A mixed blessingöAn ASTS Council viewpoint. Am J Transplant 2008;8: 2496-2502
7. Dickinson DM, Shearon TH, O'Keefe J, et al. SRTR center-specific reporting tools: Posttransplant outcomes. Am J Transplant 2006;6: 1198-1211
8. Ornstein C, Berthelsen C. UCI Medical Center on Transplant Probation; Regulators impose the lesser penalty. In the hospital's liver scandal, 32 patients died waiting. Los Angeles Times 2006. 24 March 2006
9. Ornstein C. Transplant program faulted. Los Angeles Times 2005. 28 December 2005
10. Weber T, Ornstein C. Kaiser Halts kidney venture. Los Angeles Times 2006. 13 May 2006
11. Hospital conditions of participation: Requirements for approval and re-approval of transplant centers to perform organ transplants; proposed rule. Services HaH. Federal Registrar: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid; 2005. pp. 6140-6182
12. Abecassis MM, Burke R, Klintmalm GB, et al. American Society of Transplant Surgeons transplant center outcomes requirements - A threat to innovation. Am J Transplant 2009;9: 1279-1286
13. Gillespie BW, Merion RM, Ortiz-Rios E, et al. Database comparison of the adult-to-adult living donor liver transplantation cohort study (A2ALL) and the SRTR U.S. Transplant Registry. Am J Transplant 2010;10: 1621-1633
14. Zenios S, Atias G, McCulloch C, Petrou C. Outcome differences across transplant centers: Comparison of two methods for public reporting. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2011;6: 2838-2845
15. Shahian DM, Edwards FH, Jacobs JP, et al. Public reporting of cardiac surgery performance: Part 2-implementation. Ann Thorac Surg 2011;92:S12-S23
16. Johnston SD, Morris JK, Cramb R, et al. Cardiovascular morbidity and mortality after orthotopic liver transplantation. Transplantation 2002;73: 901-906
17. Jeloka TK, Ross H, Smith R, et al. Renal transplant outcome in highcardiovascular risk recipients. Clin Transplant 2007;21: 609-614
18. Wang E, Lyuksemburg V, Skaro AI, Abecassis M. Donor and recipient risk aversion in liver transplantation. Hepatology 2011;54: 363A.
19. Schold JD, Arrington CJ, Levine G. Significant alterations in reported clinical practice associated with increased oversight of organ transplant center performance. Prog Transplant 2010;20: 279-287
20. Schold JD, Srinivas TR, Howard RJ, et al. The association of candidate mortality rates with kidney transplant outcomes and center performance evaluations. Transplantation 2008;85: 1-6
21. Howard RJ, Cornell DL, Schold JD. CMS oversight, OPOs and transplant centers and the law of unintended consequences. Clin Transplant 2009;23: 778-783
22. Epstein AM. The role of quality measurement in a competitive marketplace. Baxter Health Policy Rev 1996;2: 207-234
23. Ranji SR, Shetty K, Posley KA, et al. Closing the quality gap: A critical analysis of quality improvement strategies (vol. 6: Prevention of healthcare-associated infections). Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2007. (Technical Reviews, No. 9.6.) Available from: Http://www.ncbi.nlm. nih.gov/books/NBK43982/.
24. Ketelaar NA, Faber MJ, Flottorp S, et al. Public release of performance data in changing the behaviour of healthcare consumers, professionals or organisations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; CD004538
25. Howard DH, Kaplan B. Do report cards influence hospital choiceöThe case of kidney transplantation. Inquiry 2006;43: 150-159
26. Axelrod DA, Guidinger MK, Metzger RA, et al. Transplant center quality assessment using a continuously updatable, risk-adjusted technique (CUSUM). Am J Transplant 2006;6: 313-323
27. Collett D, Sibanda N, Pioli S, et al. The UK scheme for mandatory continuous monitoring of early transplant outcome in all kidney transplant centers. Transplantation 2009;88: 970-975