Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of quality in adult cardiac surgery: let us speak the same language

  • Special article
  • Published:
Netherlands Heart Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the last years, measurements of quality of care have become more and more a public product, used by providers, purchasers and consumers, and patients. This information serves as an important guide for improvement, as well as a decision support tool for everybody taking part in medical treatment. This evolution can be compared with advertising and as in commercials it is important to use the right information. In this report we focus on the quality of adult cardiac surgery. Honest information is of course essential, but in this article attention is asked for the variables used to evaluate the quality of cardiac surgery. (Neth Heart J 2010;18:365-9.)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Filardo G, Nicewander D, Hamilton C, et al. A hospital-randomized controlled trial of an educational quality improvement intervention in rural and small community hospitals in Texas following implementation of information technology. Am J Med Qual. 2007;22:418-27.

    Google Scholar 

  2. http://www.kiesbeter.nl/

  3. http://www.reclamecode.nl

  4. http://www.bhn-registratie.nl

  5. Institute of Medicine, Performance measurements: accelerating improvement. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2006.

  6. Een tekortschietend zorgproces. Een onderzoek naar de kwaliteit en veiligheid van de cardiochirurgische zorgketen voor volwassene in het UMC St Radboud te Nijmegen, April 2006 www.igz.nl

  7. Noyez L. Control charts, Cusum techniques and funnel plots. A review of methods for monitoring performance in healthcare. ICVTS. 2009;9:494-9.

    Google Scholar 

  8. http://www.ahrq.gov/

  9. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Quality measurement in adult cardiac surgery: Report of The Society of Thoracic Surgeons quality measurements task force. Ann Thorac Surg. 2007;83:S1-26.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Spertus JA, Eagle KA, Krumholz HM, Mitchell KR, Normand SL, for the American College of Cardiology and the American heart Association Task Force on Performance Measures. Circulation. 2005;111:1703-12.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Guru V, Anderson GM, Fremes SE, O’Connor GT, Grover FL, Tu KV, and the Canadian CABG Surgery Quality Indicator Consensus Panel. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2005;130:1257-64.

    Google Scholar 

  12. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2008 Cardiac Surgery Risk models. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;83:S1-S64.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly. 1966;44:166-206.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB, Birkmeyer NJ. Measuring the quality of surgical care: structure, process, or outcomes? J Am Coll Surg. 2004;198:626-32.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EVA, et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:N1128-37.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gibbons RJ, Smith S, Antman E. American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association clinical practice guidelines: part I: where do they come from? Circulation. 2003;107-86.

  17. Iezzoni LI. Risk adjustment for measuring health care out-comes. Chicago IL: Health Administration Press; 2003.

  18. Shahian DM, Blackstone EH, Edwards FH, et al. Cardiac surgery risk models: a position article. Ann Thorac Surg. 2004;78:1868-77.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Wouters CW, Noyez L. Is no news good news? Organized follow-up, an absolute necessity for the evaluation of myocardial revascularization. Eur J Cardiothoracic Surg. 2004;26:667-70.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Noyez L, Verheugt FWA, Swieten HA. The importance of an organized follow-up for the evaluation of mortality after hospital discharge in cardiac surgery. Interactive CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2008;7:449-51.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Noyez L, Wollersheim H. Nijmeegse Lessen. Medisch Contact. 2008;47:1962-5.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. www.bsl.nl/shop/

    L. Noyez

Authors
  1. L. Noyez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. C. Kievit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. W. A. Verkroost
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. H. B. van Wetten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. A. F. T. M. Verhagen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. H. A. van Swieten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to L. Noyez.

Additional information

Heart Center, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands

Heart Center, Department of Cardiology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands

L. Noyez Heart Center, Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery – 677, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, PO Box 9101, 6500 HB Nijmegen, the Netherlands

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Noyez, L., Kievit, P.C., Verkroost, M.W.A. et al. Evaluation of quality in adult cardiac surgery: let us speak the same language. NHJL 18, 365–369 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03091793

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03091793

Search

Navigation