Publications by authors named "Mark Antman"

3 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Society of Thoracic Surgeons 2021 Adult Cardiac Surgery Risk Models for Multiple Valve Operations.

Ann Thorac Surg 2021 Apr 9. Epub 2021 Apr 9.

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.

Background: The STS Quality Measurement Task Force has developed risk models and composite performance measures for isolated coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (CABG), isolated aortic valve replacement (AVR), isolated mitral valve replacement or repair (MVRR), AVR+CABG, and MVRR+CABG. To further enhance its portfolio of risk-adjusted performance metrics, STS has developed new risk models for multiple valve operations +/- CABG procedures.

Methods: Using July 2011 to June 2019 STS Adult Cardiac Surgery Database (ACSD) data, risk models for AVR+MVRR (n=31,968) and AVR+MVRR+CABG (n=12,650) were developed with the following endpoints: operative mortality, major morbidity (any one or more of the following: cardiac reoperation; deep sternal wound infection/mediastinitis; stroke; prolonged ventilation; and renal failure), and combined mortality and/or major morbidity. Data were divided into development (July 2011 - June 2017, n=35,109) and validation (July 2017 - June 2019, n=9,509) samples. Predictors were selected by assessing model performance and clinical face validity of full and progressively more parsimonious models. Performance of the resulting models was evaluated by assessing discrimination and calibration.

Results: C-statistics for the overall population of multiple valve +/- CABG procedures were 0.7086, 0.6734, and 0.6840 for mortality, morbidity, and combined mortality and/or morbidity in the development sample, and 0.6953, 0.6561, and 0.6634 for the same outcomes, respectively, in the validation sample.

Conclusions: New STS-ACSD risk models have been developed for multiple valve +/- CABG operations, and these models will be used in subsequent STS performance metrics.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.athoracsur.2021.03.089DOI Listing
April 2021

Using health information technology-related performance measures and tools to improve chronic care.

Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2009 May;35(5):248-55

RAND Corporation, Pittsburgh, USA.

Background: The American Medical Association led a collaborative initiative to explore opportunities for improving the quality of outpatient chronic care through the use of nationally endorsed clinical performance measures and tools. The measures and tools focused on adult diabetes, major depressive disorder, chronic stable coronary artery disease, heart failure, hypertension, and asthma.

Methods: The RAND Corporation conducted an independent, formative assessment of the initiative's four pilot activities using the Context-Input-Process-Product evaluation model.

Results: Pilots 1 and 2 demonstrated the feasibility and value of implementing performance measures and tools in practices with electronic health information systems, while highlighting the difficulty of using them in practices with paper-based systems and in community-based models, where multiple stakeholders are expected to share patient data. Pilot 3 illustrated the usefulness of validating performance measures before their use for internal quality improvement or external reporting. Pilot 4 documented the challenges involved in exporting clinical performance data from a physician practice to external entities for multiple potential uses.

Discussion: Improving the quality of chronic care through clinical performance measurement, data aggregation, and reporting will require expanded use of clinical performance measures for both internal quality improvement and pay-for-performance; integrating electronic health records (EHRs) or electronic-based registries into more physician offices; more accurate measurement and documentation of diagnoses and care procedures; EHR products that make it easier to capture certain types of information; and simplified, standardized processes for performance data extraction and exporting.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1553-7250(09)35034-5DOI Listing
May 2009

Best practice implementation: lessons learned from 20 partnerships.

Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf 2007 Dec;33(12 Suppl):16-26

Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford California, USA.

Background: Partnerships can facilitate effective implementation of best practices, but literature describing effective and ineffective strategies to address barriers to implementation in partnerships is lacking.

Methods: Principal investigators (PIs) were surveyed to identify barriers to best practice implementation, rank their significance, and articulate the success and failure of solutions attempted.

Results: The top four categories of barriers to implementation were partnership challenges, practitioner/local organization variables, time frame challenges, and financial concerns. Ninety-eight effective and 38 ineffective solutions used to overcome these barriers were identified. The most common categories of successful solutions were flexibility of interventions to align with unique local characteristics, schedules, and budgets (36.7% of listed successful solutions); communication strategies that emphasize frequent bidirectional information exchange in person (26.5%); and thoughtful use of personnel emphasizing sites' senior leadership and centralized quality and analytic content expertise (16.3%).

Discussion: Despite substantial partnership diversity, consistent themes related to barriers to implementation and solutions to these barriers emerged. The successful and unsuccessful solutions provided should be proactively assessed to enhance the likelihood of future partnership success.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s1553-7250(07)33120-6DOI Listing
December 2007