Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction: Accountability, informed consent and clinician performance information
- Part I Accountability
- Part II Informed consent
- Part III Reporting performance information
- Part introduction
- 13 Is the reporting of an individual surgeon's clinical performance doing more harm than good for patient care?
- 14 Examining the link between publicly reporting healthcare quality and quality improvement
- 15 Hospital and clinician performance data: what it can and cannot tell us
- 16 An ethical analysis of the defensive surgery objection to individual surgeon report cards
- 17 Surgeon report cards and the concept of defensive medicine
- 18 Training, innovation and surgeons' report cards
- 19 Doctors' report cards: a legal perspective
- Index
- References
15 - Hospital and clinician performance data: what it can and cannot tell us
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 08 August 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction: Accountability, informed consent and clinician performance information
- Part I Accountability
- Part II Informed consent
- Part III Reporting performance information
- Part introduction
- 13 Is the reporting of an individual surgeon's clinical performance doing more harm than good for patient care?
- 14 Examining the link between publicly reporting healthcare quality and quality improvement
- 15 Hospital and clinician performance data: what it can and cannot tell us
- 16 An ethical analysis of the defensive surgery objection to individual surgeon report cards
- 17 Surgeon report cards and the concept of defensive medicine
- 18 Training, innovation and surgeons' report cards
- 19 Doctors' report cards: a legal perspective
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
The monitoring of healthcare performance has a surprisingly long history, going back to the work of Florence Nightingale, who produced analyses of mortality outcome measures and campaigned for uniform hospital and surgical statistics (Spiegelhalter, 1999). More recently, there has been a renewed focus on monitoring clinical standards in many countries' health services, particularly in the UK in light of high-profile cases like Bristol (The Bristol Royal Infirmary Inquiry, 2001) and Shipman (Baker, 2001; Aylin et al., 2003a) and in the US with the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality's Patient Safety Initiative (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 2003) and the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's 100 000 Lives Campaign (Institute for Healthcare Improvement).
Monitoring of performance data is not straightforward, with many pitfalls and it is important to get it right. A recent report from the Royal Statistical Society noted that: ‘Performance monitoring done well is broadly productive for those concerned. Done badly, it can be very costly and not merely ineffective but harmful and indeed destructive’ (The Royal Statistical Society Working Party on Performance Monitoring of Public Services, 2003).
This chapter looks at:
Sources of data, both administrative and clinical, and their quality
Statistical issues around performance monitoring
Methods and presentation of data
How to deal with analyses suggesting poor performance
Sources of data
The Bristol Inquiry report concluded that ‘Bristol was awash with data’ (The Bristol Royal Infirmary Inquiry, 2001).
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Informed Consent and Clinician AccountabilityThe Ethics of Report Cards on Surgeon Performance, pp. 226 - 242Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007