Shaping the future of surgery - The role of private regulation in determining quality standards

被引:20
作者
Callcut, RA [1 ]
Breslin, TM [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Wisconsin, Dept Surg, Clin Sci Ctr H4 744, Madison, WI 53792 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1097/01.sla.0000200854.34298.e3
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective: To educate surgeons about the growth of the private regulatory movement and its potential implications for the practice of surgery. Methods: An in-depth analysis and literature review of one of the largest private regulatory groups, the Leapfrog Group, provides a model for understanding the impact of these groups on the practice of surgery. A detailed discussion of the history, mission, structure, and quality initiatives of Leapfrog is included. Results: Private regulatory groups are using quality standards as a method for controlling the rising cost of health care. Traditionally, little financial support, manpower, or incentives have existed for individual surgeons and hospitals to report and maintain their own outcomes data. However, as surgical outcomes have increasingly become the target of quality improvement initiatives, the need to measure performance is gaining importance. Surgical quality has been both a direct target of private regulation, as illustrated by the evidence-based hospital referral guidelines of Leapfrog, and an indirect target with initiatives like computerized physician order entry and ICU staffing guidelines. Conclusions: Private regulation is rapidly reshaping the way we practice and teach surgery. It is almost a certainty that their power, popularity, financial support, and missions will all continue to expand. As surgeons, we must decide soon if we wish to be an active participant in shaping the movement or, rather, if we are going to let it shape us by remaining largely uninvolved.
引用
收藏
页码:304 / 312
页数:9
相关论文
共 60 条
[1]
*ASS AM MED COLL, 2005, PHYS WORKF POS STAT
[2]
Barone James E, 2003, Curr Surg, V60, P218, DOI 10.1016/S0149-7944(02)00684-0
[3]
Invited commentary: Measurement of quality in surgery: That's our job [J].
Bass, BL .
SURGERY, 2004, 135 (06) :576-578
[4]
Computerized physician order entry: Helpful or harmful? [J].
Berger, RG ;
Kichak, JP .
JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL INFORMATICS ASSOCIATION, 2004, 11 (02) :100-103
[5]
Potential benefits of the new Leapfrog standards: Effect of process and outcomes measures [J].
Birkmeyer, JD ;
Dimick, JB .
SURGERY, 2004, 135 (06) :569-575
[6]
Do cancer Centers designated by the National Cancer Institute have better surgical outcomes? [J].
Birkmeyer, NJO ;
Goodney, PP ;
Stukel, TA ;
Hillner, BE ;
Birkmeyer, JD .
CANCER, 2005, 103 (03) :435-441
[7]
Contemporary trends in student selection of medical specialties - The potential impact on general surgery [J].
Bland, KI ;
Isaacs, G .
ARCHIVES OF SURGERY, 2002, 137 (03) :259-267
[8]
Effect of a multiple-site intensive care unit telemedicine program on clinical and economic outcomes: An alternative paradigm for intensivist staffing [J].
Breslow, MJ ;
Rosenfeld, BA ;
Doerfler, M ;
Burke, G ;
Yates, G ;
Stone, DJ ;
Tomaszewicz, P ;
Hochman, R ;
Plocher, DW .
CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE, 2004, 32 (01) :31-38
[9]
The leapfrog volume criteria may fall short in identifying high-quality surgical centers [J].
Christian, CK ;
Gustafson, ML ;
Betensky, RA ;
Daley, J ;
Zinner, MJ .
ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2003, 238 (04) :447-455
[10]
The relationship of surgeon and hospital volume to outcome after gastric bypass surgery in Pennsylvania: A 3-year summary [J].
Courcoulas, A ;
Schuchert, M ;
Gatti, G ;
Luketich, A .
SURGERY, 2003, 134 (04) :613-621