Benchmarking in pancreatic surgery: a systematic review of metric development and validation.

Abstract

Benchmarking in healthcare, particularly in the context of complex surgical procedures like pancreatic surgery, plays a pivotal role in comparing and evaluating the quality of care provided to patients. There is a growing body of evidence validating existent metrics and introducing new ones in the pursuit of safety and excellence in pancreatic surgery. A systematic review adhering to the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines was conducted on metric development and validation across multiple databases, including PUBMED Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science, until February 2024. The extracted data were categorized into three domains according to the Donabedian model: structure, process, and outcomes. Thirty-four studies were deemed eligible for inclusion in this review. Among these articles, 20 contributed to metric development, while 14 studies validated them. A total of 234 metrics were identified across the 34 studies, of which 185 were included in the analysis. Thirty-three of these metrics were relative to structure, 79 to processes, and 73 to outcomes. The distribution of metric domains across the included studies revealed that structure, process, and outcome domains were reported in 12, 26, and 26 studies, respectively. In conclusion, this systematic review underscores the heterogeneity in metric development methodologies and the varying degrees of consensus among different quality indicators, despite the growing interest in benchmarking in pancreatic surgery. This review aims to inform future research efforts and contribute to the ongoing pursuit of excellence in pancreatic surgical care.