TY - JOUR
T1 - Publishing Individual Surgeons’ Outcomes in Urology: Empowering Patient Choice and Improving Safety
AU - Brunckhorst, Oliver
AU - Dasgupta, Prokar
AU - O'Brien, Tim
AU - Ahmed, Kamran
N1 - Funding Information:
Acknowledgments: Oliver Brunckhorst, Prokar Dasgupta, and Kamran Ahmed acknowledge research support from the MRC Centre for Transplantation and funding from the Malcolm Coptcoat Trust and the King's Medical Research Trust. Prokar Dasgupta acknowledges funding from the KCL-Vattikuti Institute of Robotic Surgery and the GSTT Charity. Kamran Ahmed acknowledges funding from the Royal College of Surgeons of England, The Urology Foundation, and the Pelican Foundation.
PY - 2021/9
Y1 - 2021/9
N2 - Adverse surgical events continue to be prevalent and combined with growing expectations on the medical profession means an increasing trend is seen for publishing individual surgeons’ outcomes. This has brought with it concerns regarding increasing patient selection to avoid complex cases, the use of appropriate outcomes and the impact this could have on surgical training. We however argue that current benefits exceed the potential limitations with many of these concerns not yet materialising. Overall, there have been implications for improving patient safety through individual and team wide changes, and an increased availability of information for patient choice and pre-operative discussion. Therefore, in an era of transparency and accountability it is difficult to argue that surgeons’ outcomes should not be openly available in Urology.
AB - Adverse surgical events continue to be prevalent and combined with growing expectations on the medical profession means an increasing trend is seen for publishing individual surgeons’ outcomes. This has brought with it concerns regarding increasing patient selection to avoid complex cases, the use of appropriate outcomes and the impact this could have on surgical training. We however argue that current benefits exceed the potential limitations with many of these concerns not yet materialising. Overall, there have been implications for improving patient safety through individual and team wide changes, and an increased availability of information for patient choice and pre-operative discussion. Therefore, in an era of transparency and accountability it is difficult to argue that surgeons’ outcomes should not be openly available in Urology.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85116725814&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.euf.2021.09.013
DO - 10.1016/j.euf.2021.09.013
M3 - Comment/debate
SN - 2405-4569
VL - 7
SP - 901
EP - 902
JO - European Urology Focus
JF - European Urology Focus
IS - 5
ER -