Error in Table 2

Error in Table 2 Letters First, as noted in our Methods and Limitation sections, practices and protocols to replicate the outcomes of their Petrick et al correctly point out that we were only able to best performers. evaluate a subset of accredited centers within our data set. Andrew M. Ibrahim, MD, MSc If anything, a more inclusive assessment—including more Justin B. Dimick, MD, MPH accredited centers—would likely demonstrate more varia- tion, not less. Because all 12 states in our study consistently Author Affiliations: Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor demonstrated variation within themselves, we believe our (Ibrahim, Dimick); Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of findings to be robust and would replicate if more states were Michigan, Ann Arbor (Ibrahim, Dimick); Surgical Innovation Editor, JAMA assessed. Surgery (Dimick). The second point raised by Petrick et al concerns the geo- Corresponding Author: Andrew M. Ibrahim, MD, MSc, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, 2800 graphic proximity of high-performing and low-performing cen- Plymouth Ave, Bldg 10-G016, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2800 (iandrew@umich.edu). ters. They overstate our position in misquoting the article as Published Online: January 3, 2018. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.4590 declaring, “lower-quality centers were almost uniformly lo- Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported. cated near higher-quality centers.” In fact, the actual article 1. Ibrahim AM, Ghaferi AA, Thumma JR, Dimick JB. Variation in outcomes at reads, a “large proportion of lower-performing centers were bariatric surgery centers of excellence. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(7):629-636. often located in the same hospital service area as higher- 2. Ibrahim AM, Hughes TG, Thumma JR, Dimick JB. Association of hospital performing centers.” We believe this assessment to be con- critical access status with surgical outcomes and expenditures among Medicare sistent with our data. beneficiaries. JAMA. 2016;315(19):2095-2103. Third, concerns about the codes used to define complica- 3. Ibrahim AM, Ghaferi AA, Thumma JR, Dimick JB. Hospital quality and tions and perform risk adjustment are addressed in the origi- Medicare expenditures for bariatric surgery in the United States. Ann Surg. 2017;266(1):105-110. nal article and follow conventions applied in several previ- 2,3 ous studies. The additional point that accredited centers treat CORRECTION patients with higher body mass index seems moot here, as all centers in our study were accredited and presumably all carry Error in Table 2: In the Original Investigation titled “Analysis of Survival After Ini- this same additional risk factor. tiation of Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in a Surgical Intensive Care Unit,” published online June 21, 2017, and in the October print issue, there was an error Finally, we are in agreement on the potential of regional in Table 2. In the “Use of vasopressors during CRRT” row, the first 2 columns of the collaboratives to drive quality improvement. In the era of “Yes” row should read “45” and “28 (62.2).” This article was corrected online. rapid mergers and consolidations forming new hospital 1. Tatum JM, Barmparas G, Ko A, et al. Analysis of survival after initiation of networks with shared incentives, neighboring centers continuous renal replacement therapy in a surgical intensive care unit. JAMA Surg. may find themselves more aligned than ever to adopt best 2017;152(10):938-943. 192 JAMA Surgery February 2018 Volume 153, Number 2 (Reprinted) jamasurgery.com © 2017 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png JAMA Surgery American Medical Association

Error in Table 2

JAMA Surgery , Volume 153 (2) – Feb 13, 2018
Free
1 page

Loading next page...
1 Page
 
/lp/jama/error-in-table-2-0Ki9lWFJEy
Publisher
American Medical Association
Copyright
Copyright 2017 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.
ISSN
2168-6254
eISSN
2168-6262
D.O.I.
10.1001/jamasurg.2017.5387
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Letters First, as noted in our Methods and Limitation sections, practices and protocols to replicate the outcomes of their Petrick et al correctly point out that we were only able to best performers. evaluate a subset of accredited centers within our data set. Andrew M. Ibrahim, MD, MSc If anything, a more inclusive assessment—including more Justin B. Dimick, MD, MPH accredited centers—would likely demonstrate more varia- tion, not less. Because all 12 states in our study consistently Author Affiliations: Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor demonstrated variation within themselves, we believe our (Ibrahim, Dimick); Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of findings to be robust and would replicate if more states were Michigan, Ann Arbor (Ibrahim, Dimick); Surgical Innovation Editor, JAMA assessed. Surgery (Dimick). The second point raised by Petrick et al concerns the geo- Corresponding Author: Andrew M. Ibrahim, MD, MSc, Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, 2800 graphic proximity of high-performing and low-performing cen- Plymouth Ave, Bldg 10-G016, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2800 (iandrew@umich.edu). ters. They overstate our position in misquoting the article as Published Online: January 3, 2018. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.4590 declaring, “lower-quality centers were almost uniformly lo- Conflict of Interest Disclosures: None reported. cated near higher-quality centers.” In fact, the actual article 1. Ibrahim AM, Ghaferi AA, Thumma JR, Dimick JB. Variation in outcomes at reads, a “large proportion of lower-performing centers were bariatric surgery centers of excellence. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(7):629-636. often located in the same hospital service area as higher- 2. Ibrahim AM, Hughes TG, Thumma JR, Dimick JB. Association of hospital performing centers.” We believe this assessment to be con- critical access status with surgical outcomes and expenditures among Medicare sistent with our data. beneficiaries. JAMA. 2016;315(19):2095-2103. Third, concerns about the codes used to define complica- 3. Ibrahim AM, Ghaferi AA, Thumma JR, Dimick JB. Hospital quality and tions and perform risk adjustment are addressed in the origi- Medicare expenditures for bariatric surgery in the United States. Ann Surg. 2017;266(1):105-110. nal article and follow conventions applied in several previ- 2,3 ous studies. The additional point that accredited centers treat CORRECTION patients with higher body mass index seems moot here, as all centers in our study were accredited and presumably all carry Error in Table 2: In the Original Investigation titled “Analysis of Survival After Ini- this same additional risk factor. tiation of Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy in a Surgical Intensive Care Unit,” published online June 21, 2017, and in the October print issue, there was an error Finally, we are in agreement on the potential of regional in Table 2. In the “Use of vasopressors during CRRT” row, the first 2 columns of the collaboratives to drive quality improvement. In the era of “Yes” row should read “45” and “28 (62.2).” This article was corrected online. rapid mergers and consolidations forming new hospital 1. Tatum JM, Barmparas G, Ko A, et al. Analysis of survival after initiation of networks with shared incentives, neighboring centers continuous renal replacement therapy in a surgical intensive care unit. JAMA Surg. may find themselves more aligned than ever to adopt best 2017;152(10):938-943. 192 JAMA Surgery February 2018 Volume 153, Number 2 (Reprinted) jamasurgery.com © 2017 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.

Journal

JAMA SurgeryAmerican Medical Association

Published: Feb 13, 2018

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off