Physician level reporting of surgical and pathology performance indicators: a regional study to assess feasibility and impact on quality
Background There is increased awareness that, to minimize variation in clinician practice and improve quality, performance reporting should be implemented at the provider level. This optimizes physician engagement and creates a sense of professional responsibility for quality and performance measure...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Canadian Journal of Surgery 2015-02, Vol.58 (1), p.31-40 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Background There is increased awareness that, to minimize variation in clinician practice and improve quality, performance reporting should be implemented at the provider level. This optimizes physician engagement and creates a sense of professional responsibility for quality and performance measurement at the individual and organizational levels. Methods Individual provider level reporting was implemented within a provincial health region involving 56 clinicians (general surgeons, surgical oncologists, urologists and pathologists). The 2 surgical pathology indicators chosen were colorectal cancer (CRC) lymph node retrieval rate and pT2 prostate cancer margin positivity rate. Surgical resections for all prostate and colorectal cancer performed between Jan. 1, 2011, and Mar. 30, 2012, were included. We used a pre- and postsurvey design to obtain physician perceptions and focus groups with program leadership to determine organizational impact. Results Survey results showed that respondents felt the data provided in the reports were valid (67%), consistent with expectations (70%), maintained confidentiality (80%) and were not used in a punitive manner (77%). During the study period the pT2 prostate margin positivity rate decreased from 57.1% to 27.5%. For the CRC lymph node retrieval rate indicator, high baseline performance was maintained. Conclusion We developed a robust process for providing physicians with confidential, individualized surgical and pathology quality indicator reports. Our results reinforce the importance of individual physician feedback as a strategy for improving and sustaining quality in surgical and diagnostic oncology. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0008-428X 1488-2310 |
DOI: | 10.1503/cjs.004314 |