Ojs. Vanhemel et al., HOW TO COMPARE AND REPORT DEPARTMENT SPECIFIC MORTALITY-RATES FOR PEER-REVIEW USING THE PERINATAL DATABASE OF THE NETHERLANDS, European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology, 56(1), 1994, pp. 1-7
Since characteristics of patient populations of obstetric departments
vary substantially with respect to the pathology presented, (perinatal
) mortality rates as such can not be used for a fair peer review witho
ut adjustment for those differences. Using the Perinatal Database of T
he Netherlands (LVR), data on approximately 80 000 newborns annually f
rom 1985 to 1991 inclusive were used in statistical models to predict
the perinatal mortality risks of four subpopulations of different gest
ational age in about 125 obstetric departments. As predictors for peri
natal mortality we used only those risk factors which were judged to r
eflect the 'pathology' of the patient; risk factors associated with or
resulting from hospital care and/or policy are (by definition) exclud
ed. The statistical technique of logistic regression was used. The exp
ected and observed mortality within each of these four subpopulations
(for 1985-1991) was sent anonymously to each department as a specially
designed graphical overview. This method of (anonymous) peer review w
as met favourably. In peer review the difference between observed and
expected mortality should be used, rather than mortality per se, to ad
just for differences in basic risk in the intake populations on which
the departmental policy has no influence.