Influences of hospital information systems, indicator data collection and computation on reported Dutch hospital performance indicator scores

Background: For health care performance indicators (PIs) to be reliable, data underlying the PIs are required to be complete, accurate, consistent and reproducible. Given the lack of regulation of the data-systems used in the Netherlands, and the self-report based indicator scores, one would expect heterogeneity with respect to the data collection and the ways indicators are computed. This might affect the reliability and plausibility of the nationally reported scores. Methods. We aimed to investigate the extent to which local hospital data collection and indicator computation strategies differ and how this affects the plausibility of self-reported indicator scores, using survey results of 42 hospitals and data of the Dutch national quality database. Results: The data collection and indicator computation strategies of the hospitals were substantially heterogenic. Moreover, the Hip and Knee replacement PI scores can be regarded as largely implausible, which was, to a great extent, related to a limited (computerized) data registry. In contrast, Breast Cancer PI scores were more plausible, despite the incomplete data registry and limited data access. This might be explained by the role of the regional cancer centers that collect most of the indicator data for the national cancer registry, in a standardized manner. Hospitals can use cancer registry indicator scores to report to the government, instead of their own locally collected indicator scores. Conclusions: Indicator developers, users and the scientific field need to focus more on the underlying (heterogenic) ways of data collection and conditional data infrastructures. Countries that have a liberal software market and are aiming to implement a self-report based performance indicator system to obtain health care transparency, should secure the accuracy and precision of the heath care data from which the PIs are calculated. Moreover, ongoing research and development of PIs and profound insight in the clinical practice of data registration is warranted

Evaluation of routinely reported surgical site infections against microbiological culture results: a tool to identify patient groups where diagnosis and treatment may be improved

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Surgeons may improve their decision making by assessing the extent to which their initial clinical diagnosis of a surgical site infection (SSI) was supported by culture results. Aim of the present study was to evaluate routinely reported SSI by surgeons against microbiological culture results, to identify patient groups with lower agreement where decision making may be improved.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>701 admissions with SSI were reported by surgeons in a university medical centre in the period 1997-2005, which were retrospectively checked for microbiological culture results. Reporting a SSI was conditional on treatment being given (e.g. antibiotics) and was classified by severity. To identify specific patient groups, patients were classified according to the surgery group of the first operation during admission (e.g. trauma).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of all reported SSI, 523 (74.6%) had a positive culture result, 102 (14.6%) a negative culture result and 76 (10.8%) were classified as unknown culture result (due to no culture taken). Given a known culture result, reported SSI with positive culture results less often concerned trauma patients (16% versus 26%, X²= 4.99 p = 0.03) and less severe SSI (49% versus 85%, X²= 10.11 p < 0.01) suggesting that a more conservative approach may be warranted in these patients. The trauma surgeons themselves perceived to have become too liberal in administering antibiotics (and reporting SSI).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Routine reporting of SSI was mostly supported by culture results. However, this support was less often found in trauma patients and less severe SSI, thereby giving surgeons feedback that diagnosis and treatment may be improved in these cases.</p

Limitations of Tc99m-MIBI-SPECT Imaging Scans in Persistent Primary Hyperparathyroidism

In primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) the predictive value of technetium 99m sestamibi single emission computed tomography (Tc99m-MIBI-SPECT) for localizing pathological parathyroid glands before a first parathyroidectomy (PTx) is 83-100%. Data are scarce in patients undergoing reoperative parathyroidectomy for persistent hyperparathyroidism. The aim of the present study was to determine the value of Tc99m-MIBI-SPECT in localizing residual hyperactive parathyroid tissue in patients with persistent primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) after initial excision of one or more pathological glands. We retrospectively evaluated the localizing accuracy of Tc99m-MIBI-SPECT scans in 19 consecutive patients with persistent PHPT who had a scan before reoperative parathyroidectomy. We used as controls 23 patients with sporadic PHPT who had a scan before initial surgery. In patients with persistent PHPT, Tc99m-MIBI-SPECT accurately localized a pathological parathyroid gland in 33% of cases before reoperative parathyroidectomy, compared to 61% before first PTx for sporadic PHPT. The Tc99m-MIBI-SPECT scan accurately localized intra-thyroidal glands in 2 of 7 cases and a mediastinal gland in 1 of 3 cases either before initial or reoperative parathyroidectomy. Our data suggest that the accuracy of Tc99m-MIBI-SPECT in localizing residual hyperactive glands is significantly lower before reoperative parathyroidectomy for persistent PHPT than before initial surgery for sporadic PHPT. These findings should be taken in consideration in the preoperative workup of patients with persistent primary hyperparathyroidis

How do surgeons' probability estimates of operative mortality compare with a decision analytic model?

The aim of this study is to compare surgeons' estimates of operative mortality of patients with an abdominal aneurysm ( = dilation of the aorta) with the operative mortality derived from a decision analytic model and to determine how surgeons use clinical information. Four experienced surgeons are asked to estimate, among other things, the operative mortality of 137 patients. Results concerning the accuracy of surgeons' estimates show that surgeons' average operative mortality estimates are quite accurate as compared to the calculated mortalities. The standard deviations of surgeons' estimates are lower than the standard deviation of the model, however, indicating that the surgeons are not as good in distinguishing the high and low risk patients. Furthermore, surgeons show substantial inconsistencies in the weighing of the clinical information, and also differ from the model in how clinical information is weighed. Finally, when comparing the operative mortalities of the patients who died and those who did not, the model shows a modest, but higher discrimination than the surgeons. Physicians' performance seems to be influenced by the difficulty of the task (i.e. the unpredictability of the event and the multidimensionality of the task). In order to improve physicians' probability estimates, the calculations of the decision model can be used as learning tool

Different formats for communicating surgical risks to patients and the effect on choice of treatment

Effective communication of treatment risks is important to enable patients to make informed decisions. This study aimed to determine the effects of different risk formats on participants' evaluation and interpretation of risk information and on their treatment choice. Participants (N=44) were recruited among patients who had undergone surgery for an abdominal aneurysm and were asked to evaluate treatment risks (surgery or an observation policy) of two hypothetical cases presented in one of three risk formats (numbers, vertical bars or icons). Risk information presented in vertical bars was evaluated as the most difficult to comprehend, and the perceived threat of this information was evaluated as higher than that of the other risk formats. Risk information presented as icons was evaluated as more helpful for making a decision, but resulted in a lower percentage of participants choosing for surgery than when risks were presented in the other formats. In conclusion, this study showed that different risk formats have different effects on participants' evaluation of the information and on their choice. Doctors should therefore be careful in choosing the format in which they present treatment risks

Empirical data and moral theory. A plea for integrated empirical ethics.

Ethicists differ considerably in their reasons for using empirical data. This paper presents a brief overview of four traditional approaches to the use of empirical data: "the prescriptive applied ethicists," "the theorists," "the critical applied ethicists," and "the particularists." The main aim of this paper is to introduce a fifth approach of more recent date (i.e. "integrated empirical ethics") and to offer some methodological directives for research in integrated empirical ethics. All five approaches are presented in a table for heuristic purposes. The table consists of eight columns: "view on distinction descriptive-prescriptive sciences," "location of moral authority," "central goal(s)," "types of normativity," "use of empirical data," "method," "interaction empirical data and moral theory," and "cooperation with descriptive sciences." Ethicists can use the table in order to identify their own approach. Reflection on these issues prior to starting research in empirical ethics should lead to harmonization of the different scientific disciplines and effective planning of the final research design. Integrated empirical ethics (IEE) refers to studies in which ethicists and descriptive scientists cooperate together continuously and intensively. Both disciplines try to integrate moral theory and empirical data in order to reach a normative conclusion with respect to a specific social practice. IEE is not wholly prescriptive or wholly descriptive since IEE assumes an interdepence between facts and values and between the empirical and the normative. The paper ends with three suggestions for consideration on some of the future challenges of integrated empirical ethics

First the facts, then the values? Implicit normativity in evidence-based decision aids for shared decision-making

This paper focuses on the ethics of constructing and using a specific evidence-based decision aid that aims to contribute to clinical shared decision-making processes. Results of this integrated empirical ethics study demonstrate how both the production and presentation of scientific information in an evidence-based decision-support contain implicit presuppositions and values, which pre-structure the moral environment of the shared decision-making process. As a consequence, the evidencebased decision support did not only support the decision-making process; it also transformed it in a morally significant way. This phenomenon undermines the assumption within much of the literature on patient autonomy and shared decision-making implying that information disclosure is a conditional requirement before patient autonomy and shared decision-making even starts. The central point of this paper is that decision aids and evidence-based medicine are not value-free and that patient autonomy and shared decision-making are already influenced during the production and presentation of scientific information, Consequences for both the development of decision-aids and the practice of shared decision-making are discussed