[从专家协会(DGCH)的角度看外科最小病例量规定:科学、政治、治疗现实和一系列其他方面之间的平衡行为]。

4区 医学 Q3 Medicine Chirurg Pub Date : 2022-04-01 Epub Date: 2022-02-23 DOI:10.1007/s00104-022-01596-w
Hauke Lang, Peter Philipp Grimminger, Hans-Joachim Meyer
{"title":"[从专家协会(DGCH)的角度看外科最小病例量规定:科学、政治、治疗现实和一系列其他方面之间的平衡行为]。","authors":"Hauke Lang,&nbsp;Peter Philipp Grimminger,&nbsp;Hans-Joachim Meyer","doi":"10.1007/s00104-022-01596-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The scientifically founded surgical specialist discussion regarding the legal requirements for minimum volume numbers for diverse organ systems and selected surgical procedures as the basis of quality assurance and optimization of treatment is not new. Comprehensive and also reliable data from national and international studies are available for colorectal surgery, pancreatic surgery, esophageal surgery, liver surgery and gastric surgery. Recently, the raising of the minimum volume for complex esophageal interventions by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) in Germany from 10 up to 26 procedures per hospital and year, reignited the debate on this topic as well as the debate on centralization in the healthcare system in general. This decision seems to be scientifically well-justified from the perspective of political bodies and realizable in the practical implementation; however, from the perspective of physicians routinely involved in the corresponding highly complex procedures, there is a very much broader basis for discussion, which is only partially covered by a report of the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in the Healthcare System (IQWiG) as the foundation of the decision of the G‑BA. For the scientifically oriented surgical specialist society, in the first instance priority is given to the scientific evidence as the guiding principle. Nevertheless, aspects of the treatment reality cannot and should not be ignored. Therefore, the recommendations of the specialist society must be oriented not only to the quality of results but also to the realistic options for successful implementation in practice. Furthermore, questions of further education, the right of the patient to freedom of choice of the physician and preservation of the attractiveness of the occupational profile of surgeons are immanent topics for the surgical specialist society.</p>","PeriodicalId":50700,"journal":{"name":"Chirurg","volume":"93 4","pages":"342-348"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8864976/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"[Minimum case volume regulations in surgery from the perspective of the specialist society (DGCH) : Balancing act between science, politics, treatment reality and a range of other aspects].\",\"authors\":\"Hauke Lang,&nbsp;Peter Philipp Grimminger,&nbsp;Hans-Joachim Meyer\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00104-022-01596-w\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The scientifically founded surgical specialist discussion regarding the legal requirements for minimum volume numbers for diverse organ systems and selected surgical procedures as the basis of quality assurance and optimization of treatment is not new. Comprehensive and also reliable data from national and international studies are available for colorectal surgery, pancreatic surgery, esophageal surgery, liver surgery and gastric surgery. Recently, the raising of the minimum volume for complex esophageal interventions by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) in Germany from 10 up to 26 procedures per hospital and year, reignited the debate on this topic as well as the debate on centralization in the healthcare system in general. This decision seems to be scientifically well-justified from the perspective of political bodies and realizable in the practical implementation; however, from the perspective of physicians routinely involved in the corresponding highly complex procedures, there is a very much broader basis for discussion, which is only partially covered by a report of the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in the Healthcare System (IQWiG) as the foundation of the decision of the G‑BA. For the scientifically oriented surgical specialist society, in the first instance priority is given to the scientific evidence as the guiding principle. Nevertheless, aspects of the treatment reality cannot and should not be ignored. Therefore, the recommendations of the specialist society must be oriented not only to the quality of results but also to the realistic options for successful implementation in practice. Furthermore, questions of further education, the right of the patient to freedom of choice of the physician and preservation of the attractiveness of the occupational profile of surgeons are immanent topics for the surgical specialist society.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50700,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chirurg\",\"volume\":\"93 4\",\"pages\":\"342-348\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8864976/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chirurg\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-022-01596-w\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/2/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chirurg","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00104-022-01596-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

科学依据的外科专家讨论关于不同器官系统的最小体积数量的法律要求和选择的外科手术程序作为质量保证和优化治疗的基础并不新鲜。结直肠手术、胰腺手术、食管手术、肝脏手术和胃手术的综合可靠数据来自国内和国际研究。最近,德国联邦联合委员会(G-BA)将复杂食道干预的最小量从每家医院每年10例提高到26例,再次引发了关于这一主题的辩论,以及关于医疗保健系统总体集中化的辩论。从政治主体的角度看,这一决定在科学上是合理的,在实际执行中是可以实现的;然而,从常规参与相应高度复杂程序的医生的角度来看,有一个非常广泛的讨论基础,作为G - BA决定的基础,医疗保健系统质量和效率研究所(IQWiG)的一份报告只部分涵盖了这一点。对于以科学为导向的外科专科学会来说,首先要以科学证据为指导原则。然而,治疗现实的某些方面不能也不应该被忽视。因此,专家协会的建议不仅必须以结果的质量为导向,而且必须以在实践中成功执行的现实选择为导向。此外,继续教育、患者自由选择医生的权利以及保持外科医生职业形象的吸引力等问题是外科专科医师协会的内在主题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[Minimum case volume regulations in surgery from the perspective of the specialist society (DGCH) : Balancing act between science, politics, treatment reality and a range of other aspects].

The scientifically founded surgical specialist discussion regarding the legal requirements for minimum volume numbers for diverse organ systems and selected surgical procedures as the basis of quality assurance and optimization of treatment is not new. Comprehensive and also reliable data from national and international studies are available for colorectal surgery, pancreatic surgery, esophageal surgery, liver surgery and gastric surgery. Recently, the raising of the minimum volume for complex esophageal interventions by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) in Germany from 10 up to 26 procedures per hospital and year, reignited the debate on this topic as well as the debate on centralization in the healthcare system in general. This decision seems to be scientifically well-justified from the perspective of political bodies and realizable in the practical implementation; however, from the perspective of physicians routinely involved in the corresponding highly complex procedures, there is a very much broader basis for discussion, which is only partially covered by a report of the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in the Healthcare System (IQWiG) as the foundation of the decision of the G‑BA. For the scientifically oriented surgical specialist society, in the first instance priority is given to the scientific evidence as the guiding principle. Nevertheless, aspects of the treatment reality cannot and should not be ignored. Therefore, the recommendations of the specialist society must be oriented not only to the quality of results but also to the realistic options for successful implementation in practice. Furthermore, questions of further education, the right of the patient to freedom of choice of the physician and preservation of the attractiveness of the occupational profile of surgeons are immanent topics for the surgical specialist society.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Chirurg
Chirurg 医学-外科
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
91
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur Alle Gebiete der Operativen Medizen The magazine is intended for surgeons in hospitals, clinics and research. Each issue includes a comprehensive theme: Practical summaries access to selected topics and provide the reader with a compilation of current knowledge in all fields of surgery. Besides imparting relevant background knowledge, the emphasis is on the review of scientific results and practical experience. The reader will find concrete recommendations.
期刊最新文献
[Elective colorectal fast-track resections-Treatment adherence due to coordination by specialized nursing personnel]. [Anal incontinence]. [Impact of the Nursing Personnel Strengthening Act on minimally invasive surgery exemplified by right-sided hemicolectomy from an economic perspective]. [Molecule pathology in the treatment of lung cancer-Interdisciplinary view of the importance in thoracic surgery]. [Is there an indication for thyroidectomy in cases of minimally invasive follicular thyroid carcinoma?]
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1