Combining process indicators to evaluate quality of care for surgical patients with colorectal cancer: Are scores consistent with short-term outcome?
BMJ Quality and Safety , Volume 21 - Issue 6 p. 481- 489
Objective: To determine if composite measures based on process indicators are consistent with short-term outcome indicators in surgical colorectal cancer care. Design: Longitudinal analysis of consistency between composite measures based on process indicators and outcome indicators for 85 Dutch hospitals. Setting: The Dutch Surgical Colorectal Audit database, the Netherlands. Participants: 4732 elective patients with colon carcinoma and 2239 with rectum carcinoma treated in 85 hospitals were included in the analyses. Main outcome measures: All available process indicators were aggregated into five different composite measures. The association of the different composite measures with risk-adjusted postoperative mortality and morbidity was analysed at the patient and hospital level. Results: At the patient level, only one of the composite measures was negatively associated with morbidity for rectum carcinoma. At the hospital level, a strong negative association was found between composite measures and hospital mortality and morbidity rates for rectum carcinoma (p<0.05), and hospital morbidity rates for colon carcinoma. Conclusions: For individual patients, a high score on the composite measures based on process indicators is not associated with better short-term outcome. However, at the hospital level, a good score on the composite measures based on process indicators was consistent with more favourable risk-adjusted short-term outcome rates.
|BMJ Quality and Safety|
|Organisation||Department of Surgery|
Kolfschoten, N, Gooiker, G.A, Bastiaannet, E, van Leersum, N.J, van de Velde, C.J.H, Eddes, E.H, … Tollenaar, R.A.E.M. (2012). Combining process indicators to evaluate quality of care for surgical patients with colorectal cancer: Are scores consistent with short-term outcome?. BMJ Quality and Safety, 21(6), 481–489. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2011-000439