Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Quality of Surgery: Statistical vs Incidental Approaches-Reply

The Quality of Surgery: Statistical vs Incidental Approaches-Reply This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables. Abstract In Reply.—Our study was conducted, not with a preexisting bias against data management, but with such high hopes that we filed almost 28 000 facts and each year calculated 552 complication rates for 52 classes of procedures. We did not report these details because in 14 years only one difference was significant, and no calculation revealed a problem that we had not already recognized and remedied by a prompt, incidental approach to every complication. Between statistical and incidental approaches to quality there should be no conflict. The facts in our computer file and in our morbidity discussions are identical. Neither are underreported or subjective. Their differences are in what they achieve. The continuous incidental approach easily and economically optimizes outcomes by minimizing errors. The statistical approach tediously and retrospectively validates claims of acceptable outcomes. The rare need to validate claims justifies continuous filing of data but, except for infection http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Archives of Surgery American Medical Association

The Quality of Surgery: Statistical vs Incidental Approaches-Reply

Download PDF
2 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-medical-association/the-quality-of-surgery-statistical-vs-incidental-approaches-reply-hFGToG5ULj

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
0004-0010
eISSN
1538-3644
DOI
10.1001/archsurg.1993.01420130121020
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables. Abstract In Reply.—Our study was conducted, not with a preexisting bias against data management, but with such high hopes that we filed almost 28 000 facts and each year calculated 552 complication rates for 52 classes of procedures. We did not report these details because in 14 years only one difference was significant, and no calculation revealed a problem that we had not already recognized and remedied by a prompt, incidental approach to every complication. Between statistical and incidental approaches to quality there should be no conflict. The facts in our computer file and in our morbidity discussions are identical. Neither are underreported or subjective. Their differences are in what they achieve. The continuous incidental approach easily and economically optimizes outcomes by minimizing errors. The statistical approach tediously and retrospectively validates claims of acceptable outcomes. The rare need to validate claims justifies continuous filing of data but, except for infection

Journal

Archives of Surgery – American Medical Association

Published: Jan 1, 1993

There are no references for this article.