skip to main content
Language:
Search Limited to: Search Limited to: Resource type Show Results with: Show Results with: Search type Index

How reliable are surgeon‐reported data? A comparison of the British Association of Urological Surgeons radical prostatectomy audit with the National Prostate Cancer Audit Hospital Episode Statistics‐linked database

BJU international, 2021-10, Vol.128 (4), p.482-489 [Peer Reviewed Journal]

2021 The Authors. BJU International © 2021 BJU International ;2021 The Authors BJU International © 2021 BJU International. ;BJUI © 2021 BJU International ;ISSN: 1464-4096 ;EISSN: 1464-410X ;DOI: 10.1111/bju.15399 ;PMID: 33752249

Full text available

Citations Cited by
  • Title:
    How reliable are surgeon‐reported data? A comparison of the British Association of Urological Surgeons radical prostatectomy audit with the National Prostate Cancer Audit Hospital Episode Statistics‐linked database
  • Author: Aning, Jonathan J. ; Parry, Matthew G. ; Meulen, Jan ; Fowler, Sarah ; Payne, Heather ; McGrath, John S. ; Challacombe, Ben ; Clarke, Noel W.
  • Subjects: audit ; Audits ; Cancer surgery ; Datasets ; evaluation ; Patients ; PCSM ; Prostate cancer ; ProstateCancer ; Prostatectomy ; radical prostatectomy ; registry ; Statistical analysis ; surgeon‐reported outcome data ; Urological surgery ; uroonc ; validity
  • Is Part Of: BJU international, 2021-10, Vol.128 (4), p.482-489
  • Description: Objectives To evaluate the accuracy and completeness of surgeon‐reported radical prostatectomy outcome data across a national health system by comparison with a national dataset gathered independently from clinicians directly involved in patient care. Patients and Methods Data submitted by surgeons to the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) radical prostatectomy audit for all men undergoing radical prostatectomy between 2015 and 2016 were assessed by cross linkage to the National Prostate Cancer Audit (NPCA) database. Specific data items collected in both databases were selected for comparison analysis. Data completeness and agreement were assessed by percentages and Cohen’s kappa statistic. Results Data from 4707 men in the BAUS and NPCA databases were matched for comparison. Compared with the NPCA, dataset completeness was higher in the BAUS dataset for type of nerve‐sparing procedure (92% vs 42%) and postoperative margin status (89% vs 48%) but lower for readmission (87% vs 100%) and Charlson score (80% vs 100%). For all other variables assessed completeness was comparable. Agreement and data reliability were high for most variables. However, despite good agreement, the inter‐cohort reliability was poor for readmission, M stage and Charlson score (κ < 0.30). Conclusions For the first time in urology we show that surgeon‐reported data from the BAUS radical prostatectomy audit can reliably be used to benchmark peri‐operative radical prostatectomy outcomes. For comorbidity data, to assist with risk analysis, and longer‐term outcomes, NPCA routinely collected data provide a more comprehensive source.
  • Publisher: England: Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
  • Language: English
  • Identifier: ISSN: 1464-4096
    EISSN: 1464-410X
    DOI: 10.1111/bju.15399
    PMID: 33752249
  • Source: Alma/SFX Local Collection
Back to results list
INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY (84-028) 37 755 057 Feedback
19 Nguyen Huu Tho St. Dist.7, HCM thuvien@tdtu.edu.vn

Copyright © 2017 INSPIRE LIBRARY - TON DUC THANG UNIVERSITY

Searching Remote Databases, Please Wait