The American Journal of Surgery
Volume 198, Issue 5, Supplement , Pages S19-S27 , November 2009

Design and statistical methodology of the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: why is it what it is?

  • William G. Henderson, M.P.H., Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • University of Colorado, Health Outcomes Program, Aurora, CO, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +1 303 724 1165; fax: +1 303 724 1839
    • ,
  • Jennifer Daley, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Partners Community Healthcare, Inc., Boston, MA, USA

Received 2 June 2009

References 

  1. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The National Veterans Administration surgical risk study: risk adjustment for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care. J Am Coll Surg. 1995;180:519–531
  2. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. Risk adjustment of the postoperative mortality rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185:315–327
  3. Daley J, Khuri SF, Henderson W, et al. Risk adjustment of the postoperative morbidity rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185:328–340
  4. Daley J, Forbes MG, Young GJ, et al. Validating risk-adjusted surgical outcomes: site visit assessment of process and structure. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185:341–351
  5. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The Department of Veterans Affairs' NSQIP The first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. Ann Surg. 1998;228:491–507
  6. Birkmeyer JD, Shahian DM, Dimick JB, et al. Blueprint for a new American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207:777–782
  7. In:  Iezzoni LI editors. Risk Adjustment for Measuring Health Care Outcomes. Ann Arbor, MI: Health Administration Press; 1994;
  8. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. 2nd ed.. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 2000;
  9. Hsiao W, et al. Resource-based relative values: an overview. J Am Med Assoc. 1988;260:2347–2353
  10. Colorado Foundation for Medical Care. Development of Outcome Measures Using Vascular Registry Data (Final Measure Methodology Report. CMS Technical Report). July 31, 2008;
  11. Neumayer L, Mastin M, Vanderhoof L, et al. Using the Veterans Administration National Surgical Quality Improvement Program to improve patient outcomes. J Surg Res. 2000;88:58–61
  12. Hutter MM, Rowell KS, Devaney LA, et al. Identification of surgical complications and deaths: an assessment of the traditional surgical morbidity and mortality conference compared with the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203:618–624
  13. Rowell KS, Turrentine FE, Hutter MM, et al. Use of National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data as a catalyst for quality improvement. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1293–1300
  14. Orzag PR, Ellis P. Addressing rising health care costs—a view from the Congressional Budget Office. N Engl J Med. 2007;1885–1887
  15. Johnson ML, Bush RL, Collins TC, et al. Propensity score analysis in observational studies: outcomes after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Am J Surg. 2006;192:336–343
  16. Zhou XA, Johnson E, Liu D, et al. Report of the data validation subgroup of the National Surgical Quality Work Group (Technical Report, VA Central Office, Washington, DC). July 30, 2008;
  17. Hannan EL, Wu C, DeLong ER, et al. Predicting risk-adjusted mortality for CABG surgery: logistic versus hierarchical logistic models. Med Care. 2005;43:726–735
  18. Dimick JB, Chen SL, Taheri PA, et al. Hospital costs associated with surgical complications: a report from the private-sector National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199:531–537
  19. Young GJ, Charns MP, Daley J, et al. Best practices for managing surgical services: the role of coordination. Health Care Manage Rev. 1997;22:72–81
  20. Young GJ, Charns MP, Desai K, et al. Patterns of coordination and clinical outcomes: a study of surgical services. HSR. Health Serv Res. 1998;33:1211–1236
  21. Main DS, Cavendar TA, Nowels CT, et al. Relationship of processes and structures of care in general surgery to postoperative outcomes: a qualitative analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1147–1156
  22. Main DS, Henderson WG, Pratte K, et al. Relationship of processes and structures of care in general surgery to postoperative outcomes: a descriptive analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1157–1165
  23. Schifftner TL, Grunwald GK, Henderson WG, et al. Relationship of processes and structures of care in general surgery to postoperative outcomes: a hierarchical analysis. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1166–1177
  24. Itani KMF, Denwood R, Schifftner T, et al. Causes of high mortality in colorectal surgery: a review of episodes of care in Veterans Affairs hospitals. Am J Surg. 2007;194:639–645
  25. Campbell DA, Henderson WG, Englesbe MJ, et al. Surgical site infection prevention: the importance of operative duration and blood transfusion—results of the first American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Program best practices initiative. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;207:810–820
  26. Englesbe MJ, Dimick JB, Sonnenday CJ, et al. The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative: will a statewide quality improvement initiative pay for itself?. Ann Surg. 2007;246:1100–1103

PII: S0002-9610(09)00463-2

doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2009.07.025

The American Journal of Surgery
Volume 198, Issue 5, Supplement , Pages S19-S27 , November 2009

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution