The role and influence of public reporting of pediatric cardiac care outcome data

Provision of a surgeon's performance data for people considering elective surgery

BACKGROUND

A consumer model of health supports that people undergoing elective surgery should be informed about the past operative performance of their surgeon before making two important decisions: 1. to consent to the proposed surgery, and 2. to have a particular doctor perform the surgery. This information arguably helps empower patients to participate in their care. While surgeons' performance data are available in some settings, there continues to be controversy over the provision of such data to patients, and the question of whether consumers should, or want to, be provided with this information.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of providing a surgeon's performance data to people considering elective surgery on patient-based and service utilisation outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

For the original review, we searched: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, 2009, Issue 4); MEDLINE (Ovid) (1950 to 28 September 2009); EMBASE (Ovid) (1988 to 28 September 2009); PsycINFO (Ovid) (1806 to 28 September 2009); CINAHL (EBSCO) (1982 to 20 October 2009); Current Contents (Ovid) (1992 to 23 November 2009); and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (1861 to 20 October 2009).For this update, we searched: CENTRAL (2009 to 3 March 2014); MEDLINE (Ovid) (2009 to 3 March 2014); EMBASE (Ovid) (2009 to 3 March 2014); PsycINFO (Ovid) (2009 to 9 March 2014); CINAHL (EBSCO) (2009 to 9 March 2014), Current Contents (Web of Science) (November 2009 to 21 March 2014), and ProQuest Dissertations and Theses (2009 to 21 March 2014). We applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, quasi-RCTs and controlled before and after studies (CBAs), in which an individual surgeon's performance data were provided to people considering elective surgery. We considered the CBAs for inclusion from 2009 onwards.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (AH, SH) independently assessed all titles, abstracts, or both of retrieved citations. We identified no studies for inclusion. Consequently, we conducted no data collection or analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We found no studies that met the inclusion criteria; therefore, there are no results to report on the effect of the provision of a surgeon's performance data for people considering elective surgery.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no studies reporting the impact of the provision of a surgeon's performance data for people considering elective surgery. This is an important finding in itself. While the public reporting of a surgeon's performance is not a new concept, the efficacy of this data for individual patients has not been empirically tested. A review of qualitative studies or new primary qualitative research may be useful to determine what interventions are currently in use and explore the attitudes of consumers and professionals towards such interventions.

Accuracy of the all patient refined diagnosis related groups classification system in congenital heart surgery

BACKGROUND

Administrative data are increasingly used to evaluate clinical outcomes and quality of care in pediatric congenital heart surgery (CHS) programs. Several published analyses of large pediatric administrative data sets have relied on the All Patient Refined Diagnosis Related Groups (APR-DRG, version 24) diagnostic classification system. The accuracy of this classification system for patients undergoing CHS is unclear.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of all 14,098 patients 0 to 5 years of age undergoing any of six selected congenital heart operations, ranging in complexity from isolated closure of a ventricular septal defect to single-ventricle palliation, at 40 tertiary-care pediatric centers in the Pediatric Health Information Systems database between 2007 and 2010. Assigned APR-DRGs (cardiac versus noncardiac) were compared using χ2 or Fisher's exact tests between those patients admitted during the first day of life versus later and between those receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support versus those not. Recursive partitioning was used to assess the greatest determinants of APR-DRG type in the model.

RESULTS

Every patient admitted on day 1 of life was assigned to a noncardiac APR-DRG (p<0.001 for each procedure). Similarly, use of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation was highly associated with misclassification of CHS patients into a noncardiac APR-DRG (p<0.001 for each procedure). Cases misclassified into a noncardiac APR-DRG experienced a significantly increased mortality (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In classifying patients undergoing CHS, APR-DRG coding has systematic misclassifications, which may result in inaccurate reporting of CHS case volumes and mortality.