Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.
Skip to main content
Commentary
Classic

Measuring and managing quality of surgery. Statistical vs incidental approaches.

McGuire HH, Horsley JS, Salter DR, et al. Measuring and managing quality of surgery. Statistical vs incidental approaches. Arch Surg. 1992;127(6):733-7; discussion 738.

Save
Print
December 21, 2014
McGuire HH, Horsley JS, Salter DR, et al. Arch Surg. 1992;127(6):733-7; discussion 738.
View more articles from the same authors.
This study compares the costs and values of two approaches to generate quality improvement. The first, an incidental approach, uses a multidisciplinary conference format to discuss cases in which a postoperative complication occurred. The second, a statistical approach, systematically captures annual death and complication rates for comparison with previous years’ rates and national norms. While presenting tables of common surgical death and complication rates, the authors suggest that greater value exists from the incidental approach that supports necessary knowledge, safety, and effectiveness of surgeons. They conclude that both approaches should occur continuously, with the statistical approach used only to validate the effects of the incidental approach and respond to concerns of safety and quality.
Save
Print
Cite
Citation

McGuire HH, Horsley JS, Salter DR, et al. Measuring and managing quality of surgery. Statistical vs incidental approaches. Arch Surg. 1992;127(6):733-7; discussion 738.