The UK Scheme for Mandatory Continuous Monitoring of Early Transplant Outcome in all Kidney Transplant Centers

Collett, David; Sibanda, Nokuthaba; Pioli, Sue; Bradley, J. A.; Rudge, Chris

doi:10.1097/tp.0b013e3181b997de

Cited by 20 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Collett et al. suggested supplementing the one‐sided chart with an O–E CUSUM for which the slopes of the plot provide a simple estimate of the relative risk of death associated with the outcomes for the center under investigation. If O ( t ) is the observed number of failures in (0,t] and E ( t ) represents the expected number of failures; a plot of O ( t ) − E ( t ) versus t or E ( t ) is called an O–E CUSUM plot (Collett et al., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Risk‐Adjusted O–E CUSUM with Monitoring Bands for Monitoring Medical Outcomes

Sun

Kalbfleisch

2013

Biometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to monitor a medical center's survival outcomes using simple plots, we introduce a risk-adjusted Observed-Expected (O-E) Cumulative SUM (CUSUM) along with monitoring bands as decision criterion.The proposed monitoring bands can be used in place of a more traditional but complicated V-shaped mask or the simultaneous use of two one-sided CUSUMs. The resulting plot is designed to simultaneously monitor for failure time outcomes that are "worse than expected" or "better than expected." The slopes of the O-E CUSUM provide direct estimates of the relative risk (as compared to a standard or expected failure rate) for the data being monitored. Appropriate rejection regions are obtained by controlling the false alarm rate (type I error) over a period of given length. Simulation studies are conducted to illustrate the performance of the proposed method. A case study is carried out for 58 liver transplant centers. The use of CUSUM methods for quality improvement is stressed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(2000, ) and Collett et al. . This focuses on determining whether the center is performing better or worse than it has previously done.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Risk‐Adjusted O–E CUSUM with Monitoring Bands for Monitoring Medical Outcomes

Sun

Kalbfleisch

2013

Biometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For all transplant centres, we recommend regular audit of the following indices: Graft survival at 1, 3 and 5 years Rejection rate Patient survival at 1, 3 and 5 years …”

Section: Graft Dysfunctionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical practice guidelines for the provision of renal service in Hong Kong: Potential Kidney Transplant Recipient Wait‐listing and Evaluation, Deceased Kidney Donor Evaluation, and Kidney Transplant Postoperative Care

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…When retrospectively compared to currently available data reporting, the CUSUM method was found to detect clinically significant changes in center performance more rapidly (26). The United Kingdom has already adopted this methodology for use in kidney transplantation (27). Evaluation of its usefulness in a US population is ongoing.…”

Section: Impact On Program Behavior: Role Of Quality Improvement and mentioning

confidence: 99%

Program-specific reports

VanWagner

Skaro

2013

Current Opinion in Organ Transplantation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of review Measuring and monitoring transplant center performance is vital to ongoing quality assessment and performance improvement initiatives geared toward ensuring optimal care for patients with end-stage organ failure. The impact of regulatory oversight on transplant center behavior and programmatic decision-making is complex. Recent findings Program specific reports (PSR) are published by the Scientific Registry for Transplant Recipients (SRTR) and are publically available for use by a variety of stakeholders, including patients, regulators, insurers and care providers. PSRs have been both groundbreaking and controversial. The principal areas of concern relate to (a) potential unintended consequences of PSRs, (b) limitations in both the data collected by the registry and the currently used statistical methodology employed by the SRTR for risk adjustment, and (c) the subsequent impact on transplant program behavior. Summary PSRs, which serve the purposes of fueling ongoing performance improvement initiatives, and informing consumers and payers by fostering transparency in the communication of risk, also involve trade-offs due to their unintended use for regulatory oversight and subsequent impact on transplant center behavior. Future research is necessary to improve data integrity and risk adjustment methodologies which will enhance regulation and preserve access to transplantation among vulnerable patient populations.

show abstract

The UK Scheme for Mandatory Continuous Monitoring of Early Transplant Outcome in all Kidney Transplant Centers

Cited by 20 publications

References 19 publications

A Risk‐Adjusted O–E CUSUM with Monitoring Bands for Monitoring Medical Outcomes

A Risk‐Adjusted O–E CUSUM with Monitoring Bands for Monitoring Medical Outcomes

Clinical practice guidelines for the provision of renal service in Hong Kong: Potential Kidney Transplant Recipient Wait‐listing and Evaluation, Deceased Kidney Donor Evaluation, and Kidney Transplant Postoperative Care

Program-specific reports

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About