Transplant community perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of alternative quality metrics for regulation

Sarah E. Van Pilsum Rasmussen, Sheng Zhou, Alvin G. Thomas, Dorry Segev, Lauren Nicholas

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: There is concern that the metrics currently used to regulate transplant centers, one-year patient and graft survival, may have adverse consequences including decreasing higher risk donor organ acceptance and transplant volume. This raises questions about whether alternative measures would be more appropriate. Methods: We surveyed American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) and American Society of Transplantation (AST) members (n = 270) to characterize perceptions of several metrics that are used for regulation, are publicly reported, or have been suggested elsewhere, regarding their effectiveness, amenability to risk adjustment, and predicted effects on volume, mortality, and waitlist size. Results: Respondents rated one-year patient and graft survival the most effective measure of quality of care (mean scores = 7.44, 7.31, respectively, out of 10) and most amenable to risk adjustment (mean scores = 6.26, 6.13, respectively). Most respondents believed alternative metrics would not impact their center's volume, waitlist size, or one-year transplant mortality. However, some did predict unintended consequences; for example, some believed using one-year waitlist mortality, one-year mortality of patients listed, or one-year mortality of patients referred for transplant would decrease the number of transplants performed (48.6%, 46.7%, and 48.3% of respondents, respectively). Discussion: Despite previously published concerns with existing regulatory metrics, most participants did not believe any metrics would outperform one-year patient and graft survival.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article numbere13500
JournalClinical Transplantation
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2019

Fingerprint

Transplants
Graft Survival
Mortality
Risk Adjustment
Quality of Health Care
Tissue Donors
Surveys and Questionnaires

Keywords

  • insurance
  • Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients
  • survey

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Transplantation

Cite this

Transplant community perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of alternative quality metrics for regulation. / Van Pilsum Rasmussen, Sarah E.; Zhou, Sheng; Thomas, Alvin G.; Segev, Dorry; Nicholas, Lauren.

In: Clinical Transplantation, 01.01.2019.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f4535262c89d40a6bb4e64e7487156ea,
title = "Transplant community perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of alternative quality metrics for regulation",
abstract = "Background: There is concern that the metrics currently used to regulate transplant centers, one-year patient and graft survival, may have adverse consequences including decreasing higher risk donor organ acceptance and transplant volume. This raises questions about whether alternative measures would be more appropriate. Methods: We surveyed American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) and American Society of Transplantation (AST) members (n = 270) to characterize perceptions of several metrics that are used for regulation, are publicly reported, or have been suggested elsewhere, regarding their effectiveness, amenability to risk adjustment, and predicted effects on volume, mortality, and waitlist size. Results: Respondents rated one-year patient and graft survival the most effective measure of quality of care (mean scores = 7.44, 7.31, respectively, out of 10) and most amenable to risk adjustment (mean scores = 6.26, 6.13, respectively). Most respondents believed alternative metrics would not impact their center's volume, waitlist size, or one-year transplant mortality. However, some did predict unintended consequences; for example, some believed using one-year waitlist mortality, one-year mortality of patients listed, or one-year mortality of patients referred for transplant would decrease the number of transplants performed (48.6{\%}, 46.7{\%}, and 48.3{\%} of respondents, respectively). Discussion: Despite previously published concerns with existing regulatory metrics, most participants did not believe any metrics would outperform one-year patient and graft survival.",
keywords = "insurance, Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients, survey",
author = "{Van Pilsum Rasmussen}, {Sarah E.} and Sheng Zhou and Thomas, {Alvin G.} and Dorry Segev and Lauren Nicholas",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/ctr.13500",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Clinical Transplantation",
issn = "0902-0063",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Transplant community perceptions of the benefits and drawbacks of alternative quality metrics for regulation

AU - Van Pilsum Rasmussen, Sarah E.

AU - Zhou, Sheng

AU - Thomas, Alvin G.

AU - Segev, Dorry

AU - Nicholas, Lauren

PY - 2019/1/1

Y1 - 2019/1/1

N2 - Background: There is concern that the metrics currently used to regulate transplant centers, one-year patient and graft survival, may have adverse consequences including decreasing higher risk donor organ acceptance and transplant volume. This raises questions about whether alternative measures would be more appropriate. Methods: We surveyed American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) and American Society of Transplantation (AST) members (n = 270) to characterize perceptions of several metrics that are used for regulation, are publicly reported, or have been suggested elsewhere, regarding their effectiveness, amenability to risk adjustment, and predicted effects on volume, mortality, and waitlist size. Results: Respondents rated one-year patient and graft survival the most effective measure of quality of care (mean scores = 7.44, 7.31, respectively, out of 10) and most amenable to risk adjustment (mean scores = 6.26, 6.13, respectively). Most respondents believed alternative metrics would not impact their center's volume, waitlist size, or one-year transplant mortality. However, some did predict unintended consequences; for example, some believed using one-year waitlist mortality, one-year mortality of patients listed, or one-year mortality of patients referred for transplant would decrease the number of transplants performed (48.6%, 46.7%, and 48.3% of respondents, respectively). Discussion: Despite previously published concerns with existing regulatory metrics, most participants did not believe any metrics would outperform one-year patient and graft survival.

AB - Background: There is concern that the metrics currently used to regulate transplant centers, one-year patient and graft survival, may have adverse consequences including decreasing higher risk donor organ acceptance and transplant volume. This raises questions about whether alternative measures would be more appropriate. Methods: We surveyed American Society of Transplant Surgeons (ASTS) and American Society of Transplantation (AST) members (n = 270) to characterize perceptions of several metrics that are used for regulation, are publicly reported, or have been suggested elsewhere, regarding their effectiveness, amenability to risk adjustment, and predicted effects on volume, mortality, and waitlist size. Results: Respondents rated one-year patient and graft survival the most effective measure of quality of care (mean scores = 7.44, 7.31, respectively, out of 10) and most amenable to risk adjustment (mean scores = 6.26, 6.13, respectively). Most respondents believed alternative metrics would not impact their center's volume, waitlist size, or one-year transplant mortality. However, some did predict unintended consequences; for example, some believed using one-year waitlist mortality, one-year mortality of patients listed, or one-year mortality of patients referred for transplant would decrease the number of transplants performed (48.6%, 46.7%, and 48.3% of respondents, respectively). Discussion: Despite previously published concerns with existing regulatory metrics, most participants did not believe any metrics would outperform one-year patient and graft survival.

KW - insurance

KW - Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients

KW - survey

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85062729936&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85062729936&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/ctr.13500

DO - 10.1111/ctr.13500

M3 - Article

C2 - 30773685

AN - SCOPUS:85062729936

JO - Clinical Transplantation

JF - Clinical Transplantation

SN - 0902-0063

M1 - e13500

ER -