Ahern and colleagues1 explore the potential benefits and pitfalls of benchmarked reporting in the Australian context. As a binational registry of patients on renal replacement therapy in Australia and New Zealand, the Australia and New Zealand Dialysis and Transplant Registry has been producing and distributing centre-specific performance reports to renal units for over 20 years; these share many of the challenges faced by clinician-level reporting. In the past few years, this has extended to provision of an abridged version of the report on our website, containing unit-specific risk-adjusted outcome data for each dialysis and transplant unit (http://www.anzdata.org.au/v1/hospitalreport.html).
The full article is accessible to AMA members and paid subscribers. Login to read more or purchase a subscription now.
Please note: institutional and Research4Life access to the MJA is now provided through Wiley Online Library.
- 1. Ahern S, Hopper I, Evans S. Clinical quality registries for clinician level reporting: strengths and limitations. Med J Aust 2017; 206: 427-429. <MJA full text>
- 2. Page ES. Continuous inspection schemes. Biometrika 1954; 41: 100-115.
- 3. Salowski N, Snyder JJ, Zaun DA, et al. Bayesian methods for assessing transplant program performance. Am J Transplant 2014; 14: 1271-1276.
- 4. Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients. Technical methods for program-specific reports. https://www.srtr.org/media/1213/technical-methods-for-psrs-fall-2016.pdf (viewed Feb 2018).
No relevant disclosures.