Mandatory performance reporting as part of health care reform: but where are the clinical data?

Leonie M Watterson, Ross B Holland, Jan M Davies and Clifford F Hughes
Med J Aust 2010; 193 (5): . || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2010.tb03899.x
Published online: 6 September 2010

The importance to patient safety of clinician-led mortality auditing needs system-wide recognition

In April 2010, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) agreed on health and hospitals reform, with the establishment of the National Health and Hospitals Network. The aims of the network include “helping patients receive more seamless care across sectors of the health system” and “improving the quality of care” with “high-performance standards”.1 As a key component of the reforms and a funding condition, health facilities will be required to regularly report performance data to the federal government. Data will be based on national performance indicators that are already agreed to by COAG and address “access to services, quality of service delivery, financial responsibility, patient outcomes and/or patient experience”.2

  • 1 Sydney Clinical Skills and Simulation Centre, Sydney Medical School, Northern Sydney Central Coast Area Health Service, Sydney, NSW.
  • 2 University of Newcastle, Newcastle, NSW.
  • 3 University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada.
  • 4 Clinical Excellence Commission, Sydney, NSW.

Competing interests:

Leonie Watterson chaired a plenary session in an educational seminar, cohosted by the CEC and the SCIDUA, in August 2010. The CEC helped meet travel costs of the seminar’s key speakers, including those of Jan Davies. Ross Holland is a member of SCIDUA.

  • 1. Council of Australian Governments Meeting. Communiqué — Preamble. 19–20 Apr 2010. (accessed May 2010).
  • 2. Council of Australian Governments. National Health and Hospitals Network Agreement. Schedule D. Performance and accountability framework. (accessed Aug 2010).
  • 3. Gibbs N, editor. Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists Mortality Working Group. Safety of anaesthesia: a review of anaesthesia-related mortality reporting in Australia and New Zealand 2003–2005. Melbourne: ANZCA, 2009. (accessed May 2010).
  • 4. Cooper JB, Gaba D. No myth: anesthesia is a model for addressing patient safety. Anesthesiol 2002; 97: 1335-1337.
  • 5. Semmens JB, Aitken RJ, Sanfilippo FM, et al. The Western Australian Audit of Surgical Mortality: advancing surgical accountability. Med J Aust 2005; 183: 504-508. <MJA full text>
  • 6. Clinical Excellence Commission. NSW Special Committee Investigating Deaths Under Anaesthesia. (accessed May 2010).
  • 7. Lagasse RS. Anesthesia safety: model or myth? A review of the published literature and analysis of current original data. Anesthesiol 2002; 97: 1609-1617.
  • 8. Li G, Warner M, Lang BH, et al. Epidemiology of anesthesia-related mortality in the United States, 1999–2005. Anesthesiol 2009; 110: 759-765.
  • 9. Warden JC, Horan BF. Deaths attributed to anaesthesia in New South Wales, 1984–1990. Anaesth Intensive Care 1996; 24: 66-73.
  • 10. Holland R. Anaesthetic mortality in New South Wales. Br J Anaesth 1987; 59: 834-841.


remove_circle_outline Delete Author
add_circle_outline Add Author

Do you have any competing interests to declare? *

I/we agree to assign copyright to the Medical Journal of Australia and agree to the Conditions of publication *
I/we agree to the Terms of use of the Medical Journal of Australia *
Email me when people comment on this article

Online responses are no longer available. Please refer to our instructions for authors page for more information.