4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Does the participation of a surgical trainee adversely impact patient outcomes? A study of major pancreatic resections in California

期刊

SURGERY
卷 128, 期 2, 页码 286-292

出版社

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1067/msy.2000.107416

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Some patients have concerns regarding. the impact of surgical trainees on the quality of care that they receive in teaching hospital. No population-based data exist that describe outcomes of surgical procedures in teaching and nonteaching hospitals; however institutional data suggest that teaching hospital provide high-quality care. We hypothesized that the presence of a general surgery residency program (GSRP) is associated with superior outcomes for Pancreatic resection, a complex surgical procedure. Methods. A retrospective, population-based, risk-adjusted analysis of 5696 patients who underwent major pancreatic resection compares the outcomes of patients treated at hospitals with a GSRP (GSRP+) and those hospital without a GSRP (GSRP-). Results. GSRP+ hospitals had a lower operative mortality rate (8.3 % vs 11.0 %; P < .001), a lower percentage of patients discharged to another acute care hospital or skilled nursing facility (6.5% vs 13.0%; P < .001), and a longer length of stay compared with GSRP- hospitals (22.1 +/- 0.4 days vs 19.6 +/- 0.3 days; P < .001). The observed difference in hospital mortality rates was not significant after an adjustment was made for patient mix and hospital volume (9.7% vs 10.0%). However outcomes were found in the university teaching hospitals, as compared with the affiliated teaching and the nonteaching hospitals (5.3% [P < .001] vs 11.4% vs 21.0%; risk adjusted, 8.0% [P < .05] vs 10.9% vs 10.0%). Conclusions. The presence of surgical trainees does not have an adverse impact on the quality of care for One complex procedure, pancreatectomy and is associated with superior operative mortality rate in university teaching hospitals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据