Quality improvement through public reporting: The surgeon scorecard – are we there yet?

Afshin A. Anoushiravani, Zain Sayeed, Muhammad T. Padela, James E. Feng, Paul Barach, Mouhanad El-Othmani, Hussein F. Darwiche, Khaled J. Saleh


As national healthcare reform continues to place greater emphasis on providing high value care, measures designed to track clinical performance remain relatively overlooked. To that extent, several organizations have attempted to create objective grading systems to evaluate orthopaedic surgeon quality and performance. While attempting to address these issues, ProPublica’s Surgeon Scorecard has provoked national debate among patient advocates and healthcare providers. The methodology behind the Scorecard was developed at the Harvard School of Public Health with an aim to provide a more robust means of comparing surgical performance and outcomes for patients and healthcare organizations. Currently, the Scorecard assesses eight elective surgical procedures, including total knee and hip arthroplasty, through the use of the Medicare Claims Dataset. The impact of the Scorecard on orthopaedic practice has yet to be established. In this discussion, we analyze the Scorecard from the perspective of various stakeholders to identify its benefits and shortcomings, as well as offer direction for further improvement.

Full Text:


DOI: https://doi.org/10.5430/jha.v7n4p27


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Journal of Hospital Administration

ISSN 1927-6990(Print)   ISSN 1927-7008(Online)

Copyright © Sciedu Press
To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the 'Sciedupress.com' domain to your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.