Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
PulseExploreClubsResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeClubsExplore
November 1, 2006The American Surgeon

The Holy Grail of Surgical Quality Improvement: Process Measures or Risk-Adjusted Outcomes?

View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Key result

Combining process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes is essential for the future of surgical quality improvement to make surgical care safer.

Design

Review

Authors

SRSelwyn O. Rogers

Discussion

Loading...

Member takes

Overview

May guide surgical quality programs; leaves open prospective validation of combined metrics.

PICO

P
Population
Surgical quality improvement
I
Intervention / Comparator
Process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes

The combination of process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes is essential for improving surgical quality and safety.

Cite This Study

Selwyn O. Rogers (2006) conducted a review in Surgical quality improvement. Process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes was evaluated. Combining process measures and risk-adjusted outcomes is essential for the future of surgical quality improvement to make surgical care safer.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a20aa20b447e61ff57bd4fbhttps://doi.org/10.1177/000313480607201112
View Full Paper
Ask AI
Bookmark
Share

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Risk-Adjusted Surgical Outcomes2001 · 106 citations
  2. 2Quality Measurement and Improvement in General Surgery2011 · 43 citations
  3. 3The Monitoring and Improvement of Surgical-Outcome Quality2015 · 79 citations
  4. 4Quality management in surgery: improving clinical and surgical outcomes2020 · 2 citations
  5. 5Quality Measurement of Outcome in General Surgery Revisited2002 · 17 citations