ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: The publication of surgeon-specific data has been controversial. To assess the profession's opinion, a forum was organized at the 2015 EACTS meeting followed by a questionnaire of the value of surgeon-specific outcome and its impact. METHODS: A series of presentations were made including assessments of quality and safety in one major European country, the relationship between volume and outcome, the role of guidelines, the effect of publication of results on training, and discussion for and against publication of surgeon-specific data. A questionnaire was given to all attendees at the forum on the value of surgeon-specific data and their impact on the specialty. RESULTS: The questionnaire was completed by 118 attendees. Of the total, 69% felt that mortality is a surrogate for quality and that it should be reported at the hospital and unit level as opposed to the individual surgeon level, but 81% wished there were different criteria for quality outcome. Of the total, 91% felt that the individual surgeons' data should be collected but not published in public portals, and that publication produces risk-averse behaviour; 65% felt that it hinders innovation; 86% felt that EuroSCORE II is not reliable in identifying high-risk patients and the same number felt that it has affected entry into the specialty. CONCLUSIONS: The information that is collectable will be published, but we can control the way in which it is published and presented.
