Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Seeking new answers to old questions about public reporting of transplant program performance in the United States.
Kasiske, Bertram L; Wey, Andrew; Salkowski, Nicholas; Zaun, David; Schaffhausen, Cory R; Israni, Ajay K; Snyder, Jon J.
Afiliação
  • Kasiske BL; Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, Hennepin Healthcare Reseaarch Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Wey A; Department of Medicine, Hennepin Healthcare Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Salkowski N; Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, Hennepin Healthcare Reseaarch Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Zaun D; Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, Hennepin Healthcare Reseaarch Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Schaffhausen CR; Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, Hennepin Healthcare Reseaarch Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Israni AK; Department of Medicine, Hennepin Healthcare Systems, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Snyder JJ; Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients, Hennepin Healthcare Reseaarch Institute, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Am J Transplant ; 19(2): 317-323, 2019 02.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30074680
The Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients (SRTR) is mandated by the National Organ Transplant Act, the Final Rule, and the SRTR contract with the Health Resources and Services Administration to report program-specific information on the performance of transplant programs. Following a consensus conference in 2012, SRTR developed a new version of the public website to improve public reporting of often complex metrics, including changing from a 3-tier to a 5-tier summary metric for first-year posttransplant survival. After its release in December 2016, the new presentation was moved to a "beta" website to allow collection of additional feedback. SRTR made further improvements and released a new beta website in May 2018. In response to feedback, SRTR added 5-tier summaries for standardized waitlist mortality and deceased donor transplant rate ratios, along with an indicator of which metric most affects survival after listing. Presentation of results was made more understandable with input from patients and families from surveys and focus groups. Room for improvement remains, including continuing to make the data more useful to patients, deciding what additional data elements should be collected to improve risk adjustment, and developing new metrics that better reflect outcomes most relevant to patients.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos / Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde / Sistema de Registros / Coleta de Dados / Transplante de Órgãos / Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde / Registros Públicos de Dados de Cuidados de Saúde Tipo de estudo: Evaluation_studies / Qualitative_research Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Transplant Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Obtenção de Tecidos e Órgãos / Avaliação de Programas e Projetos de Saúde / Sistema de Registros / Coleta de Dados / Transplante de Órgãos / Indicadores de Qualidade em Assistência à Saúde / Registros Públicos de Dados de Cuidados de Saúde Tipo de estudo: Evaluation_studies / Qualitative_research Limite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: Am J Transplant Ano de publicação: 2019 Tipo de documento: Article