PubMed · 11275613
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
K Slim, J Chipponi. 2001. [Evidence-based digestive surgery].. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11275613/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Proponents of subspecialization in surgery claim that fellowship training improves the quality of care. Others claim that general training is adequate for most routine surgical procedures. The authors questioned whether there were differences in outcomes when general surgeons (GEN) operate on children and infants with common surgical conditions compared with the care of their pediatric surgical (PED) colleagues. METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the Healthcare Investment Analysts North Carolina Information Network database to identify patients who underwent pyloromyotomy for congenital hypertrophic pyloric stenosis in North Carolina during the period from October 1995 through September 1998 (n = 780). Information obtained included demographics, insurance type, hospital, length of stay, total hospital charges, occurrence of mucosal perforation, and type of surgeon (general v pediatric). RESULTS: Of the 780 pyloromyotomies performed, 363 (48%) were performed by pediatric surgeons. Pediatric surgeons cared for more Medicaid patients than general surgeons (PED, 52% v GEN, 40%; P =.001). Infants treated by pediatric surgeons had a lower incidence of mucosal perforation (PED, 0.5% v GEN, 2.9%; P =.0015), which was associated with decreased overall total hospital charges (no perforation, $4,806 plus minus 79 v perforation, $6,592 plus minus 492; P =.002). When patients with uncomplicated pyloric stenosis were evaluated (96% of cases), those cared for by pediatric surgeons had lower total hospital charges (PED, $4,496 plus minus 95 v GEN, $5,121 plus minus 121; P =.0001) and shorter length of stay (PED, 2.7 plus minus 0.1 days v GEN, 3.1 plus minus 0.1 days; P =.01). CONCLUSIONS: In North Carolina, general surgeons treat more than half the patients who have pyloric stenosis, though fewer with Medicaid. The cost and incidence of mucosal perforation were increased in infants with pyloric stenosis when care was provided by general rather than pediatric surgeons.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare two different approaches to the measurement of quality in general practice: data derived from routine NHS data sets and results from an index derived from patient-collected data. METHODS: A secondary analysis of existing data sets and a cross-sectional survey were carried out in Lothian, Coventry, Oxfordshire and west London. The subjects comprised randomly selected and consenting practices, and a sample of patients within these practices. A National Health Service Practice Performance Index (NHSPPI) was constructed from 16 routinely available NHS performance indicators. The Consultation Quality Index (CQI) combines the Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI) with a measure of how well the patient knew the doctor, and with observed consultation length. RESULTS: Scores for 12 of the 16 indicators varied significantly across the four regions. Mean practice NHSPPI score overall was 21.6 (SD 4.3), which varied significantly across regions. NHSPPI was predicted by practice list size, weighted deprivation index and proportion of other language patients in the practice, although their effects could not be separated. Overall there was no correlation between NHSPPI and CQI, although the prescribing component of the index was positively correlated to mean consultation length and negatively correlated with how well patients knew their doctors. CONCLUSIONS: Good quality care as assessed by patients on completion of their consultation is independent of good quality care as assessed by best available measures of practice performance. We suggest that the CQI and the NHSPPI are at least as ready for use as other measures of performance in general practice.