[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.158.98.119. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Research Letter
July 2016

Comparing Publicly Reported Surgical Outcomes With Quality Measures From a Statewide Improvement Collaborative

Author Affiliations
  • 1Department of Urology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
  • 2West Shore Urology PLC, Muskegon, Michigan
JAMA Surg. 2016;151(7):680-682. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2016.0077

The recent release of a Surgeon Scorecard has accelerated debate around the merits of publicly reporting surgical outcomes.1 Based on Medicare claims from 2009 through 2013, this scorecard provides the public with surgeon-specific complication rates for 8 elective procedures performed by nearly 17 000 surgeons. While the intent of this effort—greater transparency leading to better outcomes—is laudable, many contend that the scorecard is misleading because it provides data for a single outcome measure that may not correlate well with other quality metrics.

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×