You have accessJournal of UrologyGeneral & Epidemiological Trends & Socioeconomics: Practice Patterns, Quality of Life and Shared Decision Making IV1 Apr 2016MP37-08 MISATTRIBUTION ERRORS IN UROLOGIC PROCEDURES FROM THE PROPUBLICA SURGEON SCORECARD Young Suk Kwon, Seonghyun Kang, Wei Wang, Nicholas Farber, Kushan Radadia, Paul Lee, Jongmyung Kim, Jeong Hee Hong, and Isaac Kim Young Suk KwonYoung Suk Kwon More articles by this author , Seonghyun KangSeonghyun Kang More articles by this author , Wei WangWei Wang More articles by this author , Nicholas FarberNicholas Farber More articles by this author , Kushan RadadiaKushan Radadia More articles by this author , Paul LeePaul Lee More articles by this author , Jongmyung KimJongmyung Kim More articles by this author , Jeong Hee HongJeong Hee Hong More articles by this author , and Isaac KimIsaac Kim More articles by this author View All Author Informationhttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.juro.2016.02.1685AboutPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES The ProPublica published a surgeon scorecard displaying adjusted complication rates of nearly 17000 surgeons in the United States after analyzing Medicare billing data of eight surgical procedures. While methodological issues are controversial and the accuracy of this online tool remains to be determined, a growing number of people rely on the information presented in this publically available database. We have examined the surgeon scorecard to evaluate its accuracy and consistency with respect to urologists and urologic procedures. METHODS Data from 2009 through 2013 were queried from the ProPublica surgeon scorecard (https://projects.propublica.org/surgeons). The surgeons were categorized into two groups based on the number of performed cases (# of case ≥20 vs. <20) as presented in the scorecard. The specialties of providers who performed prostatectomy in the scorecard were verified using affiliated hospital homepage, Healthgrades (http://www.healthgrades.com), and Vitals (http://www.vitals.com). Any identified non-urologists were confirmed using at least two different sources. Similarly, all surgical procedures performed by the list of urologists provided by the scorecard were reviewed. RESULTS The total number of providers performing prostatectomy was 3040, including 972 who performed ≥20 cases, 2072 who performed <20 cases, and 4 providers who were erroneously counted twice in both categories. No errors were found for surgeons who performed ≥20 cases. However, for providers who performed <20 cases, 79 providers out of 2072 (3.81%) were non-urologists who performed prostatectomy while 38 out of 2702 (1.83%) were urologists performing non-urologic procedures based on the surgeon scorecard (table 1). CONCLUSIONS While convenient and easily accessible, ProPublica surgeon scorecard contains some misattribution errors that may inevitably compromise overall reliability of the data. While the database is updated periodically, it is advisable for the public to take caution when interpreting data and selecting surgeons based on the ProPublica surgeon scorecard. © 2016FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 195Issue 4SApril 2016Page: e499-e500 Advertisement Copyright & Permissions© 2016MetricsAuthor Information Young Suk Kwon More articles by this author Seonghyun Kang More articles by this author Wei Wang More articles by this author Nicholas Farber More articles by this author Kushan Radadia More articles by this author Paul Lee More articles by this author Jongmyung Kim More articles by this author Jeong Hee Hong More articles by this author Isaac Kim More articles by this author Expand All Advertisement Advertisement PDF downloadLoading ...
Read full abstract