A single robust and widely accepted measure for comparing outcomes between hospitals and systems would be a step forward
Surgical procedures account for large proportions of Australian healthcare activity and costs. Few Australians will never have surgery, and most will undergo several procedures during their lives. Surgery outcomes should be of interest to all, and ensuring that quality outcomes are consistently delivered should be a priority.
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Abdelsattar ZM, Habermann E, Borah BJ, et al. Understanding failure to rescue after esophagectomy in the United States. Ann Thorac Surg 2020; 109: 865‐871.
- 2. Myles PS, McIlroy DR, Shulman MA, et al. Validation of days at home as an outcome measure after surgery: a prospective cohort study in Australia. BMJ Open 2017; 7: e015828.
- 3. Bell M, Eriksson LI, Svensson T, et al. Days at home after surgery: an integrated and efficient outcome measure for clinical trials and quality assurance. EClinicalMedicine 2019; 11: 18‐26.
- 4. Meng R, Bright T, Woodman RJ, Watson DI. Hospital volume versus outcome following oesophagectomy in Australia and New Zealand. ANZ J Surg 2019; 89: 683‐688
- 5. Reilly JR, Myles PS, Wong D, et al. Hospital costs and factors associated with days alive and at home after surgery (DAH30). Med J Aust 2022; 217: 311‐317.
No relevant disclosures.