Jeffrey Parks MD FACS
  • Home
  • About
  • Contact
  • Blog
  • Videos
  • Forms
  • Podcasts

30 Day Mortality a Bad Indicator of Quality?

3/3/2015

2 Comments

 
Today in the NY Times there is an article questioning the utility of the 30 day mortality as a valid quality metric in cardiac surgery.  In some states, hospitals are required by law to publicly report 30 day mortality rates after cardiac procedures like valve replacement and coronary bypass grafting.  The article presents a case study wherein a 94 year old patient underwent aortic valve replacement and, unsurprisingly, suffers multiple post operative setbacks and complications.  Ultimately, discussions of palliative care and withdrawal of aggressive support were delayed until she reached the magical 30 day milestone.  On day 31, she was made DNR and expired shortly thereafter.  

The article makes valid critical points about the arbitrary nature of "30 day mortality rates".  Specifically, that surgeons may be reluctant to pursue aggressive care in certain patients for fear of hurting their "stats".  In addition, there is a real concern that palliative/hospice care may be delayed even when it becomes obvious that the situation is futile, thereby subjecting the patient to weeks of unnecessary suffering hooked up to ventilators in an ICU.  

These are good points.  But the lede has been buried.

The real question ought to be:  "Why the hell would you perform aortic valve replacement on a 94 year old patient?"   Simply choose to not put such a patient on the operating table and you don't have to worry about keeping her alive for 30 days.  And if surgeons feel increasingly dissuaded from performing high risk surgery on poor surgical candidates, then so be it.  Maybe that wouldn't be such a bad thing.  I like the idea of total transparency in surgery.  I like published mortality rates.  I like the idea of comparing hospitals using hard cold data.  And I think Americans ought to have a right to  access information that may impact decision making in terms of where an operation is performed.  This ought not to be all that controversial....
2 Comments
Josh
3/3/2015 03:21:08 am

Reminds me of this paper I once reviewed:

http://archsurg.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=405455

Reply
robert cook link
10/21/2015 01:39:28 pm

so doc why dont we end all sports ..people get hurt in baseball,soccer,basketball,hockey, volley ball,lacross, and just running around during recess,,,,as amatter of fact why dont we make everyone wear helmets all day long and wear bullet proof suits........were does it end maybe we should stop having children cause they might hurt even get their feelings hurt ????????
.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    Author

    Jeffrey C. Parks MD, FACS

    Archives

    December 2015
    October 2015
    July 2015
    June 2015
    May 2015
    April 2015
    March 2015
    February 2015
    January 2015

    Categories

    All
    Case Study
    General Surgery
    Healthcare Reform
    Surgery News

    RSS Feed

    RSS Feed

Proudly powered by Weebly