4.6 Article

Introducing a methodology for estimating duration of surgery in health services research

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY
卷 61, 期 9, 页码 882-889

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.10.015

关键词

health services research; postoperative complications; anesthesia time; claims base analysis; surgical outcomes; adverse medical events

资金

  1. Canada Research Chair in Medical Decision Sciences
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research
  3. National Institutes of Health Resuscitation Outcomes Consortium
  4. Clinician Scientist Training Program of the University of Toronto
  5. PSI Foundation of Ontario

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The duration of surgery is an indicator for the quality, risks, and efficiency of Surgical procedures. We introduce a new methodology for assessing the duration of surgery based oil anesthesiology billing records, along with reviewing its fundamental logic and limitations. Study Design and Setting: The validity of the methodology was assessed through a population-based cohort of patients (n = 480,986) undergoing elective operations in 246 Ontario hospitals with 1,084 anesthesiologists between April 1, 1992 and March 31, 2002 (10 years). Results: The weaknesses of the methodology relate to missing data. self-serving exaggerations by providers. imprecisions from clinical diversity, upper limits due to accounting regulations. fluctuations from updates over the years, national differences in reimbursement schedules, and the general failings of claims base analyses. The strengths of the methodology are in providing data that match clinical experiences, correspond to chart review. are consistent over time, can detect differences where differences would be anticipated, and might have implications for examining patient outcomes after long surgical times. Conclusions: We suggest that all understanding and application of large studies of surgical duration may help scientists explore selected questions concerning postoperative complications. (c) 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据