Disclosing clinical performance: the case of cardiac surgery

Emerald - Tập 24 Số 6 - Trang 571-583 - 2010
Mark Exworthy1, Glenn Smith1, Jonathan Gabe1, Ian Rees Jones2
1Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK
2Bangor University, Bangor, UK

Tóm tắt

PurposeIn recent years, the clinical performance of named cardiac surgeons in England has been disclosed. This paper aims to explore the nature and impact of disclosure of clinical performance.Design/methodology/approachThe paper draws on literature from across the social sciences to assess the impact of disclosure, as a form of transparency, in improving clinical performance. Specifically, it employs the “programme theory” of disclosure.FindingsThe “programme theory” of disclosure involves identification, naming, public sanction and recipient response. Named individual (consultant) surgeons have been identified through disclosure but this masks the contribution of the clinical team, including junior surgeons. Mortality is the prime performance measure but given low mortality rates, there are problems interpreting this measure. The naming of surgeons has been achieved through disclosure on web sites, developed between the health‐care regulator and the surgical profession itself. However, participation remains voluntary. The intention of disclosure is that interested parties (especially patients) will shun poorly performing surgeons. However, these parties' willingness and ability to exercise this sanction appears limited. Surgeons' responses are emergent but about a quarter of surgeons are not participating currently. Fears that surgeons would avoid high‐risk patients seem to have been unrealised. While disclosure may have a small effect on individual reputations, the surgical profession as a whole has embraced disclosure.Originality/valueWhile the aim of disclosure has been to create a transparent medical system and to improve clinical performance, disclosure may have the opposite effect, concealing some performance issues and possibly strengthening professional autonomy. Disclosure therefore represents greater transparency in health‐care but it is uncertain whether it will improve performance in the ways that the policy intends.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Arrow, K.J. (1963), “Uncertainty and the welfare economics of medical care”, American Economic Review, Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 941‐73. Barr, D.A., Fenton, L. and Blane, D. (2008), “The claim for patient choice and equity”, Journal of Medical Ethics, Vol. 34, pp. 271‐4. BBC (2009a), “Heart surgery ’more successful’”, available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8170618.stm (accessed 29 July 2009). BBC (2009b), “Hospital publishes mortality rate”, available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/8185202.stm (accessed 5 August 2009). Bates, D. and Gawande, A. (2000), “The impact of the internet on quality measurement”, Health Affairs, Vol. 19 No. 6, pp. 104‐14. Bridgewater, B., Grayson, A.D., Brooks, N., Grotte, G., Fabri, B.M., Au, J., Hooper, T., Jones, M. and Keogh, B. (2007), “Has the publication of cardiac surgery outcome data been associated with changes in practice in Northwest England: an analysis of 25,730 patients undergoing CABG surgery under 30 surgeons over eight years”, Heart, Vol. 93 No. 6, pp. 744‐8. Byrne, L. (2009), “Reinventing government”, The Times, 7 December, available at: www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article6946614.ece. Clarke, S. and Oakley, J. (2007), Informed Consent and Clinician Accountability: The Ethics of Report Cards on Surgeon Performance, CUP, Cambridge. Coulter, A., Le Maistre, N. and Henderson, L. (2005), Evaluation of London Patient Choice: Patients' Experience of Choosing Where to Undergo Surgical Treatment, Picker Institute Europe, Oxford. Darzi, A. (2008), High Quality Care for All: NHS Next Stage Review Final Report, Cmd.7432, Department of Health, London. Davies, H.T.O., Nutley, S.M. and Smith, P.C. (Eds.) (2000), What Works: Evidence‐based Policy and Practice in Public Services, Policy Press, Bristol. Day, P.A. and Klein, R. (2004), Study of the Commission for Health Improvement, King's Fund, London. Exworthy, M. (1998), “Clinical audit in the NHS internal market: from peer review to external monitoring”, Public Policy and Administration, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 40‐53. Exworthy, M. and Halford, S. (Eds.) (1999), Professionals and the New Managerialism in the Public Sector, Open University Press, Buckingham. Exworthy, M. and Peckham, S. (2006), “Access, choice and travel: the implications for health policy”, Social Policy and Administration, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 267‐87. Exworthy, M., Wilkinson, E.K., McColl, A., Roderick, P., Smith, H., Moore, M. and Gabbay, J. (2003), “The role of performance indicators in changing the autonomy of the general practice profession in the UK”, Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 56, pp. 1493‐504. Fisse, B. and Braithwaite, J. (1983), The Impact of Publicity on Corporate Offenders, State University of New York Press, Albany, NY. Fitzgerald, L. and Ferlie, L. (2000), “Professionals: back to the future?”, Human Relations, Vol. 53 No. 5, pp. 713‐39. Flynn, R. (2002), “Clinical governance and governmentality”, Health, Risk and Society, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 155‐73. Fotaki, M.A. (2006), Patient Choice and the Organization and Delivery of Health Services: Scoping Review Report for the NCCSDO, Manchester Centre for Public Policy and Management, Manchester. Freidson, E. (1994), Professionalism Re‐Born: Theory, Prophecy and Policy, Polity Press, Oxford. Gabe, J., Jones, I.R. and Exworthy, M. (2007), “Managing medical performance through the publication of surgical performance data: a framework for analysis”, paper presented at the European Sociological Association Conference, Glasgow, September. Gawande, A. (2007), Surgeon's Notes on Performance, Metropolitan Books, New York, NY. Giddens, A. (1984), The Constitution of Society: Outline of the Theory of Structuration, Polity, Cambridge. Greener, I. (2005), “The role of the patient in healthcare reform: customer, consumer or creator?”, in Dawson, S. and Sausman, C. (Eds), Future Health Organizations, Palgrave, London. Greenhalgh, J., Long, A.F. and Flynn, R. (2005), “The use of patient reported outcome measures in routine clinical practice: lack of impact or lack of theory?”, Social Science and Medicine, Vol. 60 No. 4, pp. 833‐43. Habermas, J. (1987), The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1, Beacon Press, Boston, MA. Hirschmann, A. (1970), Exit, Voice and Loyalty, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA. Hood, C. (2007), “What happens when transparency meets blame‐avoidance?”, Public Management Review, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 191‐210. Hunter, D.J. (2009), “The case against choice and competition”, Health Economics, Policy and Law, Vol. 4, pp. 489‐501. IPSOS‐Mori (2009), “Doctors once again the most trusted profession”, 12 February, available at: www.ipsospublicaffairs.co.uk/researchpublications/researcharchive/poll.aspx?oitemid=2274. Katz, P. (1998), The Scalpel's Edge: The Culture of Surgeons, Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA. Levay, C. and Waks, C. (2009), “Professions and the pursuit of transparency in healthcare: two cases of soft autonomy”, Organization Studies, Vol. 30, pp. 509‐27. Lindberg, S. (2001), “Social rationality versus rational egoism”, in Turner, J. (Ed.), Handbook of Sociological Theory, Kluwer, New York, NY. Mannion, R. and Goddard, M. (2003), “Public disclosure of comparative clinical performance data: lessons from the Scottish experience”, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 9 No. 2, pp. 277‐86. Marshall, M.N., Shekelle, R., Brook, B. and Leatherman, S. (2000), Dying to Know: Public Release of Information about Quality of Health‐care, Nuffield Trust, London. Marshall, M.N., Shekelle, P., Davies, H.T.O. and Smith, P.C. (2003), “Public reporting on quality in the United States and the United Kingdom”, Health Affairs, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 134‐48. Marshall, S., Haywood, K. and Fitzpatrick, R. (2006), “Impact of patient‐reported outcome measures on routine practice: a structured review”, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, Vol. 12 No. 5, pp. 559‐68. Merton, R.K. (1936), “The unanticipated consequences of purposive social action”, American Sociological Review, Vol. 1 No. 6, pp. 894‐904. Murero, M., D'Ancona, G. and Karamanoukian, H. (2001), “Use of the internet by patients before and after cardiac surgery: an interdisciplinary telephone survey”, Journal of Medical Internet Research, Vol. 3 No. 3, p. e27. Nettleton, S., Burrows, R. and Watt, I. (2008), “Regulating medical bodies? The consequences of the ‘modernisation’ of the NHS and the disembodiment of clinical knowledge”, Sociology of Health and Illness, Vol. 30 No. 3, pp. 333‐48. Pawson, R. (2002), “Evidence and policy and naming and shaming”, Policy Studies, Vol. 23 Nos 3‐4, pp. 211‐30. Pawson, R. and Tilley, N. (1997), Realistic Evaluation, Sage, London. Pawson, R., Greenhalgh, T., Harvey, G. and Walshe, K. (2005), “Realist review – a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions”, Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, Vol. 10 No. 1, p. 21‐34. Prat, A. (2006), “The more closely we are watched, the better we behave?”, in Hood, C. and Heald, D. (Eds), Transparency: The Key to Better Governance?, Oxford University Press, Oxford, Chapter 6. Royal Surrey County Hospital (2009), available at: www.royalsurrey.nhs.uk/. Roxburgh, J. (2004), “Foreword”, in Keogh, B. and Kinsman, R. (Eds), Fifth National Adult Cardiac Surgical Database Report 2003: Improving Outcomes for Patients, Society of Cardiothoracic Surgeons of Great Britain and Ireland, London. Santry, C. (2009), “CQC names high death‐rate trusts”, Health Service Journal, 20 August, pp. 4‐5. Shekelle, P., Lim, Y‐W., Mattke, S. and Damberg, C. (2008), Does Public Release of Performance Results Improve Quality of Care?, Health Foundation, London. Smith, P.C. (1995), “On the unintended consequences of publishing performance data in the public sector”, International Journal of Public Administration, Vol. 18 Nos 2 and 3, pp. 277‐310. Smith, R. (2009), “NHS hospitals rated like TripAdvisor on new web site”, Daily Telegraph, 11 August, available at: www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6005822/NHS‐hospitals‐rated‐like‐TripAdvisor‐on‐new‐web site.html (accessed 16 September 2009). Society of Cardiac‐Thoracic Surgeons (2009), available at: www.scts.org/sections/audit/Cardiac/index.html. Street, A. (2000), “Confident about efficiency measurement in the NHS?”, Health Care UK, Spring, pp. 47‐52. Titmuss, R.M. (1968), Commitment to Welfare, Allen and Unwin, London. Treasure, T. (2006), “The evidence on which to base practice: different tools for different times”, European Journal of Cardio‐thoracic Surgery, Vol. 30 No. 6, pp. 819‐24. Tsoukas, H. (1997), “The tyranny of light”, Futures, Vol. 29 No. 9, pp. 827‐43. Weber, M. (1978), Economy and Society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology, Vol. 1, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Emerald

Tập 24 Số 6

571-583

Thông tin tác giả