Quality Improvement Initiatives in Colorectal Surgery: Value of Physician Feedback

Diseases of the Colon and Rectum

Volumn 60, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 213-218

  Waters, Joshua A ^a   Francone, Todd ^a   Marcello, Peter W ^a   Roberts, Patricia L ^a   Schoetz, David J ^a   Read, Thomas E ^a   Stafford, Caitlin ^a   Ricciardi, Rocco ^a  

^a LAHEY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Anastomotic leak; Colorectal; Outcome; Quality improvement; Surgical Care Improvement Program

Indexed keywords

ANTIBIOTIC AGENT;

ADULT; ANASTOMOSIS LEAKAGE; CATHETER REMOVAL; COHORT ANALYSIS; COLORECTAL SURGERY; CONFERENCE PAPER; DEEP VEIN THROMBOSIS; FEMALE; HOSPITAL READMISSION; HUMAN; LUNG EMBOLISM; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT COMPLIANCE; PREOPERATIVE CARE; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGEON; SURGICAL INFECTION; SURGICAL MORTALITY; TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; ABDOMINAL SURGERY; AGED; ANASTOMOSIS; ANASTOMOTIC LEAK; ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS; BLADDER CATHETERIZATION; FEEDBACK SYSTEM; MORTALITY; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES; PROTOCOL COMPLIANCE; STANDARDS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION; TEACHING HOSPITAL; TERTIARY CARE CENTER; TREATMENT OUTCOME; URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS; VENOUS THROMBOSIS;

ADULT; AGED; ANASTOMOSIS, SURGICAL; ANASTOMOTIC LEAK; ANTIBIOTIC PROPHYLAXIS; COLORECTAL SURGERY; DIGESTIVE SYSTEM SURGICAL PROCEDURES; FEEDBACK; FEMALE; GUIDELINE ADHERENCE; HOSPITALS, TEACHING; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MORTALITY; OUTCOME AND PROCESS ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT READMISSION; POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PRACTICE GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; QUALITY IMPROVEMENT; REOPERATION; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SURGEONS; SURGICAL WOUND INFECTION; TERTIARY CARE CENTERS; URINARY CATHETERIZATION; URINARY TRACT INFECTIONS; VENOUS THROMBOSIS;

EID: 85009904485     PISSN: 00123706     EISSN: 15300358     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000755     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Mem Fund Q. 1966;44:166-l206
2. Berenguer CM, Ochsner MG Jr, Lord SA, Senkowski CK. Improving surgical site infections: using National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data to institute Surgical Care Improvement Project protocols in improving surgical outcomes. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210:737-741
3. Etzioni DA, Wasif N, Dueck AC, et al. Association of hospital participation in a surgical outcomes monitoring program with inpatient complications and mortality. JAMA. 2015;313:505-511
4. Shackford SR, Hyman N, Ben-Jacob T, Ratliff J. Is risk-adjusted mortality an indicator of quality of care in general surgery? A comparison of risk adjustment to peer review. Ann Surg. 2010;252:452-458
5. Kuhnen AH, Marcello PW, Roberts PL, et al. Can the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program provide surgeon-specific outcomes? Dis Colon Rectum. 2015;58:247-253
6. American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Definitions. Available at: http://www.acsnsqip. org Accessed November 2015
7. Krukowski J, Al-Khairy G, Russell EM, Park KG. Systematic review of the definition and measurement of anastomotic leak after gastrointestinal surgery. Br J Surg. 2001;88:1157-1168
8. Ricciardi R, Roberts PL, Marcello PW, Hall JF, Read TE, Schoetz DJ. Anastomotic leak testing after colorectal resection: what are the data? Arch Surg. 2009;144:407-411
9. Specifications Manual for Joint Commission National Quality Core Measures. Available at:https://manual.jointcommission. org/releases/archive/TJC2010B/SurgicalCareImprovementProject. html. Accessed November 1, 2015
10. Ivanovic J, Anstee C, Ramsay T, et al. Using surgeon-specific outcome reports and positive deviance for continuous quality improvement. Ann Thorac Surg. 2015;100:1188-194
11. Maruthappu M, Trehan A, Barnett-Vanes A, McCulloch P, Carty MJ. The impact of feedback of surgical outcome data on surgical performance: a systematic review. World J Surg. 2015;39:879-889
12. Yi SG, Wray NP, Jones SL, et al. Surgeon-specific performance reports in general surgery: an observational study of initial implementation and adoption. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217: 636-647.e1
13. Boyce MB, Browne JP. The effectiveness of providing peer benchmarked feedback to hip replacement surgeons based on patient-reported outcome measures-results from the PROFILE (Patient-Reported Outcomes: Feedback Interpretation and Learning Experiment) trial: a cluster randomised controlled study. BMJ Open. 2015;5:e008325
14. Ingraham AM, Cohen ME, Bilimoria KY, et al. Association of surgical care improvement project infection-related process measure compliance with risk-adjusted outcomes: implications for quality measurement. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;211:705-714
15. Hawn MT, Vick CC, Richman J, et al. Surgical site infection prevention: time to move beyond the surgical care improvement program. Ann Surg. 2011;254:494-499
16. Altom LK, Deierhoi RJ, Grams J, et al. Association between Surgical Care Improvement Program venous thromboembolism measures and postoperative events. Am J Surg. 2012;204:591-597
17. Wick EC, Galante DJ, Hobson DB, et al. Organizational culture changes result in improvement in patient-centered outcomes: implementation of an integrated recovery pathway for surgical patients. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221:669-677
18. He X, Chen Z, Huang J, et al. Stapled side-to-side anastomosis might be better than handsewn end-to-end anastomosis in ileocolic resection for Crohn's disease: a meta-analysis. Dig Dis Sci. 2014;59:1544-1551
19. Nurudeen SM, Kwakye G, Berry WR, et al. Can 360-degree reviews help surgeons? Evaluation of multisource feedback for surgeons in a multi-institutional quality improvement project. J Am Coll Surg. 2015;221:837-844