3.8 Article

Textbook Outcome as a Quality Metric in Liver Transplantation

Journal

TRANSPLANTATION DIRECT
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/TXD.0000000000001322

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Ohio State University Center for Clinical and Translational Science [UL1TR00273]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Traditionally, the quality of liver transplantation is measured by 1-year patient and graft survival rates. However, as these survival rates exceed 90%, there is a need for more informative metrics. Textbook outcomes (TOs) describe ideal patient outcomes after surgery, and this study shows that TO is an important measure of quality in liver transplantation, in addition to 1-year patient and graft survival rates.
Background. Quality in liver transplantation (LT) is currently measured using 1-y patient and graft survival. Because patient and graft survival rates now exceed 90%, more informative metrics are needed. Textbook outcomes (TOs) describe ideal patient outcomes after surgery. This study critically evaluates TO as a quality metric in LT. Methods. United Network for Organ Sharing data for 25 887 adult LT recipients were used to define TO as patient and graft survival >1 y, length of stay <= 10 d, 0 readmissions within 6 mo, absence of rejection, and bilirubin <3 mg/dL between months 2 and 12 post-LT. Univariate analysis identified donor and recipient characteristics associated with TO. Covariates were analyzed using purposeful selection to construct a multivariable model, and impactful variables were incorporated as linear predictors into a nomogram. Five-year conditional survival was tested, and center TO rates were corrected for case complexity to allow for center-level comparisons. Results. The national average TO rate is 37.4% (95% confidence interval, 36.8%-38.0%). The hazard ratio for death at 5 y for patients who do not experience TO is 1.22 (95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.34; P <= 0.0001). Our nomogram predicts TO with a C-statistic of 0.68. Center-level comparisons identify 31% of centers as high performing and 21% of centers as below average. High rates of TO correlate only weakly with center volume. Conclusions. The composite quality metric of TO after LT incorporates holistic outcome measures and is an important measure of quality in addition to 1-y patient and graft survival.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available