Search

Benchmarking in healthcare, particularly in the context of complex surgical procedures like pancreatic surgery, plays a pivotal role in comparing and evaluating the quality of care provided to patients. There is a growing body of evidence validating existent metrics and introducing new ones in the pursuit of safety and excellence in pancreatic surgery. A systematic review adhering to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was conducted on metric development and validation across multiple databases, including PUBMED Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science, until February 2024. The extracted data were categorized into three domains according to the Donabedian model: structure, process, and outcomes. Thirty-four studies were deemed eligible for inclusion in this review. Among these articles, 20 contributed to metric development, while 14 studies validated them. A total of 234 metrics were identified across the 34 studies, of which 185 were included in the analysis. Thirty-three of these metrics were relative to structure, 79 to processes, and 73 to outcomes. The distribution of metric domains across the included studies revealed that structure, process, and outcome domains were reported in 12, 26, and 26 studies, respectively. In conclusion, this systematic review underscores the heterogeneity in metric development methodologies and the varying degrees of consensus among different quality indicators, despite the growing interest in benchmarking in pancreatic surgery. This review aims to inform future research efforts and contribute to the ongoing pursuit of excellence in pancreatic surgical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The calculation of aggregated composite measures is a widely used strategy to reduce the amount of data on hospital report cards. Therefore, this study aims to elicit and compare preferences of both patients as well as referring physicians regarding publicly available hospital quality information Methods: Based on systematic literature reviews as well as qualitative analysis, two discrete choice experiments (DCEs) were applied to elicit patients' and referring physicians' preferences. The DCEs were conducted using a fractional factorial design. Statistical data analysis was performed using multinomial logit models Results: Apart from five identical attributes, one specific attribute was identified for each study group, respectively. Overall, 322 patients (mean age 68.99) and 187 referring physicians (mean age 53.60) were included. Our models displayed significant coefficients for all attributes (p < 0.001 each). Among patients, "Postoperative complication rate" (20.6%; level range of 1.164) was rated highest, followed by "Mobility at hospital discharge" (19.9%; level range of 1.127), and "The number of cases treated" (18.5%; level range of 1.045). In contrast, referring physicians valued most the "One-year revision surgery rate" (30.4%; level range of 1.989), followed by "The number of cases treated" (21.0%; level range of 1.372), and "Postoperative complication rate" (17.2%; level range of 1.123) Conclusion: We determined considerable differences between both study groups when calculating the relative value of publicly available hospital quality information. This may have an impact when calculating aggregated composite measures based on consumer-based weighting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of outcome reporting after elective visceral surgery in a low volume district hospital. Outcome measurement as well as transparent reporting of surgical complications becomes more and more important. In the future, financial and personal resources may be distributed due to reported quality and thus, it is in the main interest of healthcare providers that outcome data are accurately collected. Between 10/2020 and 09/2021 postoperative complications during the hospitalisation were recorded using the Clavien–Dindo classification (CDC) and comprehensive complication index by residents of a surgical department in a district hospital. After one year of prospective data collection, data were retrospectively analyzed and re-evaluated for accuracy by senior consultant surgeons. In 575 patients undergoing elective general or visceral surgery interns and residents reported an overall rate of patients with complications of 7.3% (n = 42) during the hospitalization phase, whereas a rate of 18.3% (n = 105) was revealed after retrospective analysis by senior consultant surgeons. Thus, residents failed to report patients with postoperative complications in 60% of cases (63/105). In the 42 cases, in which complications were initially reported, the grading of complications was correct only in 33.3% of cases (n = 14). Complication grades that were most missed were CDC grade I and II. Quality of outcome measurement in a district hospital is poor if done by unexperienced residents and significantly underestimates the true complication rate. Outcome measurement must be done or supervised by experienced surgeons to ensure correct and reliable outcome data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The choice of a hospital should be based on individual need and accessibility. For maternity hospitals, this includes known or expected risk factors, the geographic accessibility and level of care provided by the hospital. This study aims to identify factors influencing hospital choice with the aim to analyze if and how many deliveries are conducted in a risk-appropriate and accessible setting in Bavaria, Germany. Methods: This is a cross-sectional secondary data analysis based on all first births in Bavaria (2015-18) provided by the Bavarian Quality Assurance Institute for Medical Care. Information on the mother and on the hospital were included. The Bavarian Index of Multiple Deprivation 2010 was used to account for area-level socioeconomic differences. Multiple logistic regression models were used to estimate the strength of association of the predicting factors and to adjust for confounding. Results: We included 195,087 births. Distances to perinatal centers were longer than to other hospitals (16 km vs. 12 km). 10% of women with documented risk pregnancies did not deliver in a perinatal center. Regressions showed that higher age (OR 1.03; 1.02–1.03 95%-CI) and risk pregnancy (OR 1.44; 1.41–1.47 95%-CI) were associated with choosing a perinatal center. The distances travelled show high regional variation with a strong urban-rural divide. Conclusion: In a health system with free choice of hospitals, many women chose a hospital close to home and/or according to their risks. However, this is not the case for 10% of mothers, a group that would benefit from more coordinated care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aims to determine the intention to use hospital report cards (HRCs) for hospital referral purposes in the presence or absence of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) as well as to explore the relevance of publicly available hospital performance information from the perspective of referring physicians. Methods: We identified the most relevant information for hospital referral purposes based on a literature review and qualitative research. Primary survey data were collected (May–June 2021) on a sample of 591 referring orthopedists in Germany and analyzed using structural equation modeling. Participating orthopedists were recruited using a sequential mixed-mode strategy and randomly allocated to work with HRCs in the presence (intervention) or absence (control) of PROs. Results: Overall, 420 orthopedists (mean age 53.48, SD 8.04) were included in the analysis. The presence of PROs on HRCs was not associated with an increased intention to use HRCs (p = 0.316). Performance expectancy was shown to be the most important determinant for using HRCs (path coefficient: 0.387, p <.001). However, referring physicians have doubts as to whether HRCs can help them. We identified "complication rate" and "the number of cases treated" as most important for the hospital referral decision making; PROs were rated slightly less important. Conclusions: This study underpins the purpose of HRCs, namely to support referring physicians in searching for a hospital. Nevertheless, only a minority would support the use of HRCs for the next hospital search in its current form. We showed that presenting relevant information on HRCs did not increase their use intention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: To explore responses from primary care physicians (PCPs) from an integrative physician (IP) consultation and recommended integrative oncology (IO) treatment program. Methods: Chemotherapy-treated patients were referred by their oncology healthcare professional to an IP, a physician dually trained in complementary medicine and supportive cancer care. The consultation summary and patient-centered IO treatment program was then sent to the patient’s PCP, with PCP-to-IP responses analyzed qualitatively using ATLAS.Ti software for systematic coding and content analysis. Trial Registration Number NCT01860365 published May 22, 2013. Results: Of the 597 IP consultations conducted, 470 (78.7%) summaries were sent to patients’ PCPs, with only 69 (14.7%) PCP-to-IP responses returned. PCPs were more likely to respond if the patient was Hebrew-speaking (78.3% vs. 65.1%, P = 0.032). Systematic coding identified four predominant themes among PCP narratives: addressing the patient’s medical condition and leading QoL-related concerns; patient-centered reflections; available resources providing support and promoting resilience; and PCP attitudes to the IO treatment program. Conclusion: PCP-IP communication can provide valuable insight into the patient’s bio-psycho-social care, addressing the patient’s health-belief model, emotional concerns, caregiver-related factors, preferences, and barriers to adherence to IO care. Practice implications: Healthcare services should consider promoting IP-PCP communication in order to facilitate better patient outcomes from an IO treatment program. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality. In Austria, the disease is responsible for nearly 36% of the total deaths in 2020. Continuous cardiovascular health promotion and disease prevention become increasingly important. Events might offer an effective way to foster such cardiovascular health promotion towards the entire family. However, this form of health promotion, including the motivation to participate in such health events, has not yet been the focus of literature. This study aims to provide first explorative insights into the attendance motivation of participants of cardiovascular health promotion events. Numerous authors state that the motivation to attend events is influenced by the demographic characteristics of the visitors. Therefore, the potential impact of attendees' demographic characteristics is explicitly included in the methodological design of this study. A survey was distributed at the Austrian 'Heart Health Day' and completed by 117 attendees. Results reveal that for health promotion events the dimensions of topic and individual interest in the issue of heart health were the key motivations to attend the event. Social aspects were less important for this specific health event. The study confirmed a relation between the demographic factors age and marital status towards the motivational dimensions to attend the health promotion event. By providing first explorative empirical evidence on attendance motivation in a health care setting, this study contributes to a more profound understanding of cardiovascular health promotion. Findings may help managers of healthcare events to better understand attendance motivation and more strategically plan and manage this kind of events. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A positive relationship between treatment volume and outcome quality has been demonstrated in the literature and is thus evident for a variety of procedures. Consequently, policy makers have tried to translate this so-called volume–outcome relationship into minimum volume regulation (MVR) to increase the quality of care—yet with limited success. Until today, the effect of strict MVR application remains unclear as outcome quality gains cannot be estimated adequately and restrictions to application such as patient travel time and utilization of remaining hospital capacity are not considered sufficiently. Accordingly, when defining MVR, its effectiveness cannot be assessed. Thus, we developed a mixed integer programming model to define minimum volume thresholds balancing utility in terms of outcome quality gain and feasibility in terms of restricted patient travel time and utilization of hospital capacity. We applied our model to the German hospital sector and to four surgical procedures. Results showed that effective MVR needs a minimum volume threshold of 125 treatments for cholecystectomy, of 45 and 25 treatments for colon and rectum resection, respectively, of 32 treatments for radical prostatectomy and of 60 treatments for total knee arthroplasty. Depending on procedure type and incidence as well as the procedure's complication rate, outcome quality gain ranged between 287 (radical prostatectomy) and 977 (colon resection) avoidable complications (11.7% and 11.9% of all complications). Ultimately, policy makers can use our model to leverage MVR's intended benefit: concentrating treatment delivery to improve the quality of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Chirurg is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Der Onkologe is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Quality competition among hospitals, induced by patients freely choosing their hospital in a price regulated market, can only be realized if quality differences between hospitals are transparent, understandable, and thus influence patients' hospital choice. We use data from ~145,000 German patients and ~ 900 hospitals for colorectal resections and knee replacements to investigate whether patients value quality and specialization when choosing their hospital. Using a random utility choice model, we estimate patients' marginal utilities, willingness to travel and change in hospital demand for quality improvements. Patients respond to service quality and specialization and thus, quality competition seems to be present. Colorectal resection patients are willing to travel longer for more specialized hospitals (+9% for procedure volume, +9% for certification). Knee replacement patients travel longer for hospitals with better service quality (+6%) and higher procedure volume (+12%). However, clinical quality indicators, often difficult to access and interpret, barely play a role in patients' hospital choice. Furthermore, we find that competition on quality for colorectal resection is rather local, whereas for knee replacement we observe regional competition patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Chirurg is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Pädiatrie & Pädologie is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Importance: Physician attitudes about websites that publicly report health care quality and experience data have not been recently described.Objectives: To examine physician attitudes about the accuracy of websites that report information about quality of care and patient experience and to describe physician beliefs about the helpfulness of these data for patients choosing a physician.Design, Participants, and Measures: The Rhode Island Department of Health (RIDOH) and a multi-stakeholder group developed and piloted two questions that were added to RIDOH's biennial physician survey of all 4197 practicing physicians in Rhode Island: (1) "How accurate of a picture do you feel that the following types of online resources give about the quality of care that physicians provide?" (with choices) and (2) "Which types of physician-specific information (i.e., not about the practice overall) would be helpful to include in online resources for patients to help them choose a new physician? (Select all that apply)." Responses were stratified by primary care vs. subspecialty clinicians. Summary statistics and chi-squared tests were used to analyze the results.Results: Among 1792 respondents (response rate 43%), 45% were unaware of RIDOH's site and 54% were unaware of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)' quality reporting sites. Only 2% felt that Medicare sites were "very accurate" in depicting physician quality. Most physicians supported public reporting of general information about physicians (e.g., board certification), but just over one-third of physicians felt that performance-based quality measures are "helpful" (and a similar percentage reported that patient reviews felt are "helpful") for patients choosing a physician.Conclusions: Physician-respondents were either uninformed or skeptical about public reporting websites. In contrast to prior reports that a majority of patients value some forms of publicly reported data, most physicians do not consider quality metrics and patient-generated reviews helpful for patients who are choosing a physician. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a need to measure and improve the quality of paediatric primary care in Europe where major differences in the delivery and outcomes of child health care exist. A collaborative panel of paediatric senior experts developed a Core Set of Indicators for Paediatric Primary Care in Europe by compiling 42 quality indicators in a modified consensus process following the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of the quality indicator set in European paediatric primary care practices. Seventy-nine practices from eight countries participated in a detailed online interview. The practices rated the applicability, relevance, reliability and acceptance of the 42 quality indicator as well as the availability, technical feasibility and effort to retrieve the needed data from their medical records. Most quality indicators were considered applicable, available, reliable, acceptable and relevant for monitoring quality of care in paediatric primary care. Respondents rated feasibility and effort to retrieve the data lowest because of difficulties collecting the data from the medical records.Conclusion: European paediatric primary care practices generally agree with the proposed quality indicator set. They document most of the parameters. However, the collection of specific needed values from available routine patient-data is considered technically difficult and time-consuming. What is Known? • Paediatric primary care systems in Europe show striking differences in their performance. Pre-existing sets of quality indicators are predominantly limited to national populations, specific diseases and hospital care. • A Core Set of 42 quality indicators for paediatric primary care in Europe was developed by European paediatricians using a systematic literature review and a consensus process following a modified RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. What is New? • Paediatric primary care providers in Europe agree with the idea to use COSI-PPC-EU to monitor and improve the quality of care. The set was considered applicable, available, reliable, acceptable, and relevant for quality improvement. • The score for feasibility and effort to retrieve the data was low, because of technical reasons; the electronical or paper-based medical documentation in most cases does not allow convenient access to all necessary data. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This paper analyses the volume-outcome relationship and the effects of minimum volume regulations in the German hospital sector.Methods: We use a full sample of administrative data from the unselected, complete German hospital population for the years 2005 to 2007. We apply regression methods to analyze the association between volume and hospital quality. We measure hospital quality with a binary variable, which indicates whether the patient has died in hospital. Using simulation techniques we examine the impact of the minimum volume regulations on the accessibility of hospital services.Results: We find a highly significant negative relationship between case volume and mortality for complex interventions at the pancreas and oesophagus as well as for knee replacement. For liver, kidney and stem cell transplantation as well as for CABG we could not find a strong association between volume and quality. Access to hospital care is only moderately affected by minimum volume regulations.Conclusion: The effectiveness of minimum volume regulations depends on the type of intervention. Depending on the type of intervention, quality gains can be expected at the cost of slightly decreased access to care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: The wide use of hip and knee arthroplasty has led to implementation of volume standards for hospitals and surgeons. For shoulder arthroplasty, the effect of volume on outcome has been researched, but no volume standard exists. This review assessed literature reporting on shoulder arthroplasty volumes and its relation to patient-reported and functional outcomes to define an annual volume threshold.Materials and Methods: MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for articles published until February 2018 reporting on the outcome of primary shoulder arthroplasty in relation to surgeon or hospital volume. The primary outcome was predefined as any patient-reported outcome. The secondary outcome measures were length of stay, costs, rates of mortality, complications, readmissions, and revisions. A meta-analysis was performed for outcomes reported by two or more studies.Results: Eight retrospective studies were included and did not consistently show any associations of volume with in-hospital complications, revision, discharge to home or cost. Volume was consistently associated with length of stay (shorter length of stay for higher volume) and in-hospital complications (fewer in-hospital complications for higher volume). It was not consistently associated with mortality. Functional outcomes were not reported.Conclusions: There is insufficient evidence to support the concept that only the number of shoulder arthroplasties annually performed (either per hospital or per surgeon) results in better patient-reported and functional outcomes. Currently, published volume thresholds are only based on short-term parameters such as length and cost of hospital stay. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Unfallchirurg is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Health care is a tremendously expensive service that deeply impacts the daily life of individuals. It has become crucial to understand all the factors that influence the usage of these services. Word-of-mouth (WOM) is such a factor, because it strongly affects the health behavior. A research gap exists when it comes to the analysis of the current state of WOM research in the health care sector. Based on a comprehensive literature review of the leading scientific journals in the health care sector, this paper investigates existing WOM studies. The investigated studies emphasize hospital recommendations as well as the necessary preconditions for WOM. The studies highlight that there are factors which are favorable to WOM and might be influenced by service providers and payers. Fewer studies concerned the spread and impact dimension. In this regard it is somewhat unexpected that three times more studies focus on the preconditions for WOM than the actual impact of WOM. Only a small number of electronic WOM studies could be found. Stakeholder theory suggests emphasizing factors which benefit WOM. As WOM might spread in networks and influence large groups of people, stakeholder theory further proposes considering WOM as a possible way to distribute specific health care recommendations. Even if the studies highlight the importance of WOM, several research gaps still exist. For example, due to the strong focus on hospitals, recent research seems to neglect WOM concerning health care providers such as a general practitioners or nursing homes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Der Urologe A is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Improving spatial accessibility to hospitals is a major task for health care systems which can be facilitated using recent methodological improvements of spatial accessibility measures. We used the integrated floating catchment area (iFCA) method to analyze spatial accessibility of general inpatient care (internal medicine, surgery and neurology) on national level in Germany determining an accessibility index (AI) by integrating distances, hospital beds and morbidity data. The analysis of 358 million distances between hospitals and population locations revealed clusters of lower accessibility indices in areas in north east Germany. There was a correlation of urbanity and accessibility up to r = 0.31 (p < 0.001). Furthermore, 10% of the population lived in areas with significant clusters of low spatial accessibility for internal medicine and surgery (neurology: 20%). The analysis revealed the highest accessibility for heart failure (AI = 7.33) and the lowest accessibility for stroke (AI = 0.69). The method applied proofed to reveal important aspects of spatial accessibility i.e. geographic variations that need to be addressed. However, for the majority of the German population, accessibility of general inpatient care was either high or at least not significantly low, which suggests rather adequate allocation of hospital resources for most parts of Germany. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]