Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Key Topics in Surgical Research and Methodology pp 151–164Cite as

How can we Assess Quality of Care in Surgery?

  • Chapter

  • 2783 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter explores and outlines existing research in the area of quality of care and identifies methods by which future research should be conducted. Before we try and assess quality of care, we must first be able to define it, although this in itself is complicated by the complexity of interacting factors that determine quality health care. The characterisation by a conceptual model of structure-process-outcome and the importance of health economics is discussed. The proposed attributes of health care which can define its quality are also presented.

Existing initiatives that benchmark quality of care have a tendency to be generic and give us only an indication of minimum standards. The components of future assessment tools for quality of care are proposed along with how “frontline” quality improvement can be facilitated by conceptual frameworks for designing health system reforms and engaging contemporary managerial capabilities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   299.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Abbreviations

NHS:

National Health Service

U.K.:

United Kingdom

U.S.:

United States

References

  1. Chassin MR, Galvin RW (1998) The urgent need to improve health care quality. Institute of Medicine National Roundtable on Health Care Quality. JAMA 280:1000–1005

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Anonymous (1986) Quality of care. Council on Medical Service. JAMA 256:1032–1034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. BUPA Hospitals. Available at http://www.bupa-hospitals.co.uk/asp/patientcare/quality.asp#2. Accessed July 2007

  4. Donabedian A (1966) Evaluating the Quality of Medical Care. The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly 44:166–203

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Donabedian A (1990) The seven pillars of quality. Arch Pathol Lab Med 114:1115–1118

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. SchiffGD, Rucker TD (2001) Beyond structure-process-outcome: Donabedian's seven pillars and eleven buttresses of quality. Jt Comm J Qual Improv 27:169–174

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Brook RH, Park RE, Chassin MR et al (1990) Predicting the appropriate use of carotid endarterectomy, upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, and coronary angiography. N Engl J Med 323:1173–1177

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Brook RH, Park RE, Chassin MR et al (1990) Carotid endar-terectomy for elderly patients: predicting complications. Ann Intern Med 113:747–753

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. The Leapfrog Group. Available at http://www.leapfrog-group.org. Accessed June 2007

  10. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W et al (1999) Relation of surgical volume to outcome in eight common operations: results from the VA National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann Surg 230:414–429; discussion 429–432

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Fraser I (2003) Volume thresholds and hospital characteristics in the United States. Health Aff(Millwood) 22:167–177

    Google Scholar 

  12. Pronovost PJ, Angus DC, Dorman T et al (2002) Physician staffing patterns and clinical outcomes in critically ill patients: a systematic review. JAMA 288:2151–2162

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Treggiari MM, Martin DP, Yanez ND et al (2007) Effect of intensive care unit organizational model and structure on outcomes in patients with acute lung injury. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 176:685–690

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Malin JL, Schneider EC, Epstein AM et al (2006) Results of the National Initiative for Cancer Care Quality: how can we improve the quality of cancer care in the United States? J Clin Oncol 24:626–634

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lilford RJ, Brown CA, Nicholl J (2007) Use of process measures to monitor the quality of clinical practice. BMJ 335:648–650

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Chassin MR, KosecoffJ, Park RE et al (1987) Does inappropriate use explain geographic variations in the use of health care services? A study of three procedures. JAMA 258:2533–2537

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Brook RH (1989) Practice guidelines and practicing medicine. Are they compatible? JAMA 262:3027–3030

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Jamtvedt G, Young JM, Kristoffersen DT et al (2006) Audit and feedback: effects on professional practice and health care outcomes. Cochrane Database Syst Rev CD000259

    Google Scholar 

  19. Al-Ruzzeh S, Athanasiou T, Mangoush O et al (2005) Predictors of poor mid-term health related quality of life after primary isolated coronary artery bypass grafting surgery. Heart 91:1557–1562

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Dr Foster Good hospital Guide. Available at http://www.drfoster.co.uk/ghg. Accessed May 2007

  21. The Healthcare Commission. Available at http://www.health-carecommission.org.uk/homepage.cfm. Accessed May 2007

  22. Pitches DW, Mohammed MA, Lilford RJ (2007) What is the empirical evidence that hospitals with higher-risk adjusted mortality rates provide poorer quality care? A systematic review of the literature. BMC Health Serv Res 7:91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Hofer TP, Hayward RA (1996) Identifying poor-quality hospitals. Can hospital mortality rates detect quality problems for medical diagnoses? Med Care 34:737–753

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Zalkind DL, Eastaugh SR (1997) Mortality rates as an indicator of hospital quality. Hosp Health Serv Adm 42:3–15

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Thomas JW, Hofer TP (1999) Accuracy of risk-adjusted mortality rate as a measure of hospital quality of care. Med Care 37:83–92

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. NICE (2006) Update on Herceptin appraisal. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, London

    Google Scholar 

  27. DH (2005) Healthcare output and productivity: accounting for quality change. Department of Health, London

    Google Scholar 

  28. National Programme Budget project. Available at http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Managingyourorganisation/Financeandplanning/Programmebudgeting/index.htm. Accessed September 2007

  29. Office for National Statistics (2006) Public service productivity: health. Econ Trends 628:26–57

    Google Scholar 

  30. Atkinson T (2005) Atkinson review of government output and productivity for the national accounts: final report. HMSO, London

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hayes JL, Hansen P (2007) Is laparoscopic colectomy for cancer cost-effective relative to open colectomy? ANZ J Surg 77:782–786

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Topal B, Peeters G, Verbert A et al (2007) Outpatient laparo-scopic cholecystectomy: clinical pathway implementation is efficient and cost effective and increases hospital bed capacity. Surg Endosc 21:1142–1146

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Fisher JA, Fikry C, Troxel AB (2006) Cutting cost and increasing access to colorectal cancer screening: another approach to following the guidelines. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 15:108–113

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Thomson R, Taber S, Lally J et al (2004) UK Quality Indicator Project (UK QIP) and the UK independent health care sector: a new development. Int J Qual Health Care 16(Suppl 1):i51–i56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Available at https://acsnsqip.org/main/about_history.asp. Accessed July 2007

  36. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson WG (2002) The comparative assessment and improvement of quality of surgical care in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Arch Surg 137:20–27

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Lindenauer PK, Remus D, Roman S et al (2007) Public reporting and pay for performance in hospital quality improvement. N Engl J Med 356:486–496

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Park SM, Park MH, Won JH et al (2006) EuroQol and survival prediction in terminal cancer patients: a multicenter prospective study in hospice-palliative care units. Support Care Cancer 14:329–333

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Doran T, Fullwood C, Gravelle H et al (2006) Pay-for-performance programs in family practices in the United Kingdom. N Engl J Med 355:375–384

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Fourth National Vascular Dataset Report. The Vascular Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Available at http://www.vascular-society.org.uk/committees/audit.asp. Accessed May 2007

  41. Pink GH, Brown AD, Studer ML et al (2006) Pay-for-performance in publicly financed healthcare: some international experience and considerations for Canada. Healthc Pap 6:8–26

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Petersen LA, Woodard LD, Urech T et al (2006) Does pay-for-performance improve the quality of health care? Ann Intern Med 145:265–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Curtin K, Beckman H, Pankow G et al (2006) Return on investment in pay for performance: a diabetes case study. J Healthc Manag 51:365–374; discussion 375–6

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Roland M (2006) Pay-for-performance: too much of a good thing? A conversation with Martin Roland. Interview by Robert Galvin. Health Aff(Millwood) 25: w412–w419

    Google Scholar 

  45. O'Brien SM, Shahian DM, DeLong ER et al (2007) Quality measurement in adult cardiac surgery: part 2–Statistical considerations in composite measure scoring and provider rating. Ann Thorac Surg 83:S13–S26

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Shahian DM, Edwards FH, Ferraris VA et al (2007) Quality measurement in adult cardiac surgery: part 1–Conceptual framework and measure selection. Ann Thorac Surg 83: S3–12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Birkmeyer JD, Birkmeyer CM, Wennberg DE et al (2000) Leapfrog patient safety standards: the potential benefits of universal adoption. Leapfrog Group: Washington

    Google Scholar 

  48. Leatherman S, Sutherland K (2007) Designing national quality reforms: a framework for action. Int J Qual Health Care 19(6):334–340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Glickman SW, Baggett KA, Krubert CG et al (2007) Promoting quality: the health-care organization from a management perspective. Int J Qual Health Care

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Biosurgery and Surgical Technology, Imperial College London, 10th Floor, QEQM Building, St Mary's Hospital Campus, Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, UK

    Erik Mayer & Thanos Athanasiou

  2. Department of Biosurgery and Surgical Technology, Imperial College London, QEQM Building, St Mary's Hospital Campus, 10th Floor, Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, UK

    Andre Chow

  3. The Department of Biosurgery and Surgical Technology, Imperial College London, 10th Floor, Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother (QEQM) Building, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, St Mary's Hospital Campus, Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, UK

    Lord Ara Darzi

Authors
  1. Erik Mayer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andre Chow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lord Ara Darzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thanos Athanasiou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Biosurgery & Surgical Technology, Imperial College London St. Mary's Hospital London, 10th floor QEQM Bldg. Praed Street, London, W2 1NY, United Kingdom

    Thanos Athanasiou  & Ara Darzi  & 

  2. UCSF Global Health Sciences, 3333 California Street, Suite 285, San Francisco L, CA, 94143-0443, USA

    Haile Debas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Mayer, E., Chow, A., Darzi, L.A., Athanasiou, T. (2010). How can we Assess Quality of Care in Surgery?. In: Athanasiou, T., Debas, H., Darzi, A. (eds) Key Topics in Surgical Research and Methodology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71915-1_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-71915-1_13

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-71914-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-71915-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation