Developing minimally invasive procedure quality metrics: one step at a time



Despite extensive first-hand surgical experience, rank and file members of surgical societies are generally not trained in and have not therefore been included in surgical quality measure development. The purpose of this exercise was to determine if a structured quality metric design tool could bridge this gap, facilitating rapid development of focused quality metrics by minimally invasive surgeon attendees of the April 2018 SAGES Annual Meeting.


Expert minimally invasive surgeons attended a 90-min workshop with didactic and interactive quality metric design sessions during the Annual Meeting. The interactive portion was formed around a novel structured quality measure development tool that graded presenting symptoms, short-term complications, and long-term disutility of care.


For first-time symptomatic inguinal hernia repair, first-time small to moderate size ventral hernia repair, and elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, each workgroup was able to develop one quality, one short-term complication, and one long-term disutility metric.


A structured quality metric design tool facilitates application of knowledge through rapid development of multifaceted, patient-centric outcomes measures by expert minimally invasive surgeons, otherwise not formally trained in metric development. The exercise also highlighted the need to rigorously define denominator populations and to guard against metric-driven undertreatment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1


  1. 1.

    Ayanian JZ, Markel H (2016) Donabedian’s lasting framework for health care quality. N. Engl J Med 375(3):205–207

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Donabedian A (1966) Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Mem Fund Q 44(Suppl):166–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Khullar D. How can you tell whether your doctor is any good? The Washington Post. 2018 July 22, 2018;Sect. Health & Science

  4. 4.

    Martin R (2009) The Design of business. Harvard Business School Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Field B, Booth A, Ilott I, Gerrish K (2014) Using the knowledge to action framework in practice: a citation analysis and systematic review. Implement Sci 9:172

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Simpson L

  7. 7.

    Dua A, Desai SS, Seabrook GR, Brown KR, Lewis BD, Rossi PJ et al (2014) The effect of surgical care improvement project measures on national trends on surgical site infections in open vascular procedures. J Vasc Surg 60(6):1635–1639

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Teisberg EO, Wallace S (2009) Creating a high-value delivery system for health care. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 21(1):35–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Wallace S, Teisberg E. Measuring what matters: Connecting excellence, professionalism, and empathy.

  10. 10.

    Alam R, Figueiredo SM, Balvardi S, Nauche B, Landry T, Lee L et al. Development of a patient-reported outcome measure of recovery after abdominal surgery: a hypothesized conceptual framework. Surg Endosc. 2018

  11. 11.

    Chou E, Abboudi H, Shamim Khan M, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K (2015) Should surgical outcomes be published? J R Soc Med 108(4):127–135

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Abu Hilal M, Aldrighetti L, Dagher I, Edwin B, Troisi RI, Alikhanov R et al (2018) The southampton consensus guidelines for laparoscopic liver surgery: from indication to implementation. Ann Surg 268(1):11–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Pennell CP, Hirst A, Sedrakyan A, McCulloch PG (2016) Adapting the IDEAL framework and recommendations for medical device evaluation: a modified delphi survey. Int J Surg (London England) 28:141–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas A. Aloia.

Ethics declarations


Thomas A. Aloia, Timothy Jackson, Amir Ghaferi, Jonathan Dort, Erin Schwarz, and John Romanelli have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aloia, T.A., Jackson, T., Ghaferi, A. et al. Developing minimally invasive procedure quality metrics: one step at a time. Surg Endosc 33, 679–683 (2019).

Download citation


  • Surgical outcomes
  • Complications
  • Standard of care
  • Patient-reported outcomes