Ethics Governance
Ethics & Governance - Resources and Articles |
| Articles indexes: a | b | c | d | e | f | g | h | i | j | k | l | m | n | o | p | q | r | s | t | u | v | w | x | y | z | other | |
|
|
| Article - Abstract. To view full article click on the article title. | |
eMJA: Public reporting of individual surgeon performance information: United Kingdom developments and Australian issues The United Kingdom is currently introducing public reporting of performance information for individual cardiac surgeons. The reports will indicate whether a surgeon has an acceptable level of performance, measured by in-hospital mortality. In the United States, surgeon-specific performance data have been available for over a decade. Arguments from both safety and accountability perspectives provide strong justifications for public reporting of such data. Were Australia to adopt similar public reporting processes, we should learn from overseas experiences. Surgical associations should be actively involved in developing data standards and processes for data collection, validation, analysis and publication. Any Australian policy initiative for public reporting of individual surgeon data should be backed by a political commitment to adequate funding. There is increasing evidence that public reporting of comparative performance data improves quality of healthcare.1 However, the most controversial question is whether patients should have access to performance data for individual clinicians. In the United States, outcomes data for individual cardiac surgeons have been publicly available in New York State since 1991, in Pennsylvania since 1992, and in New Jersey since 1994.2-4 In the United Kingdom, performance information for individual cardiac surgeons will be made public this year for the first time: the Society of Cardiothoracic Surgeons will be releasing mortality information for the approximately 180 surgeons who perform coronary artery bypass surgery.5,6 Performance reporting overseas: In the US, the key comparator reported is the surgeon’s risk-adjusted mortality rate. Full Article: http://www.mja.com.au/public/issues/181_05_060904/nei10121_fm.html |
|
2006 Ethics-Governance.com |
|||