Consensus recommendations on how to assess the quality of surgical interventions

Postoperative complications represent a major public health burden worldwide. Without standardized, clinically relevant and universally applied endpoints, the evaluation of surgical interventions remains ill-defined and inconsistent, opening the door for biased interpretations and hampering patient-centered health care delivery. We conducted a Jury-based consensus conference incorporating the perspectives of different stakeholders, who based their recommendations on the work of nine panels of experts. The recommendations cover the selection of postoperative outcomes from the perspective of patients and other stakeholders, comparison and interpretation of outcomes, consideration of cultural and demographic factors, and strategies to deal with unwarranted outcomes. With the recommendations developed exclusively by the Jury, we provide a framework for surgical outcome assessment and quality improvement after medical interventions, that integrates the main stakeholders’ perspectives.

Contributors

Anja Domenghino, Carmen Walbert, Dominique Lisa Birrer, Milo A. Puhan, Pierre-Alain Clavien? & The Outcome4Medicine consensus group

Publication

Journal: Nature medicine
Volume: 29
Issue:
Pages: 811 - 822
Year: 2023
DOI: 10.1038/s41591-023-02237-3

Further Study Information

Current Stage: Completed
Date:
Funding source(s):


Health Area

Disease Category: Public health

Disease Name: N/A

Target Population

Age Range: Unknown

Sex:

Nature of Intervention: Surgery

Stakeholders Involved

Study Type

- COS methods research

Method(s)

- Consensus conference

We conducted a Jury-based consensus conference incorporating the perspectives of different stakeholders, who based their recommendations on the work of nine panels of experts.

Linked Studies

    No related studies


Related Links

    No related links