Public reporting of cardiac surgery performance: Part 1 - History, rationale, consequences

Published

Journal Article

Cardiac surgical report cards have historically been mandatory. This paradigm changed when The Society of Thoracic Surgeons recently implemented a voluntary public reporting program based on benchmark analyses from its National Cardiac Database. The primary rationale is to provide transparency and accountability, thus affirming the fundamental ethical right of patient autonomy. Previous studies suggest that public reporting facilitates quality improvement, although other approaches such as confidential feedback of results and regional quality improvement initiatives are also effective. Public reporting has not substantially impacted patient referral patterns or market share. However, this may change with implementation of healthcare reform and with refinement of public reporting formats to enhance consumer interpretability. Finally, the potential unintended adverse consequences of public reporting must be monitored, particularly to assure that hospitals and surgeons remain willing to care for high-risk patients. © 2011 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.

Full Text

Duke Authors

Cited Authors

  • Shahian, DM; Edwards, FH; Jacobs, JP; Prager, RL; Normand, SLT; Shewan, CM; O'Brien, SM; Peterson, ED; Grover, FL

Published Date

  • January 1, 2011

Published In

Volume / Issue

  • 92 / 3 SUPPL.

Electronic International Standard Serial Number (EISSN)

  • 1552-6259

International Standard Serial Number (ISSN)

  • 0003-4975

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

  • 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2011.06.102

Citation Source

  • Scopus