Judging surgical research: How should we evaluate performance and measure value?

Objective To establish criteria to evaluate performance in surgical researc h, and to suggest strategies to optimize research in the future. Summary Background Data Research is an integral component of the academic m ission, focusing on important clinical problems, accounting for surgical ad vances, and providing training and mentoring for young surgeons, With const raints on healthcare resources, there is increasing pressure to generate cl inical revenues at the expense of the time and effort devoted to surgical r esearch. An approach that would assess the value of research would allow pr ioritization of projects. Further, alignment of high-priority research proj ects with clinical goals would optimize research gains and maximize the cli nical enterprise. Methods The authors reviewed performance criteria applied to industrial res earch and modified these criteria to apply to surgical research. They revie wed several programs that align research objectives with clinical goals. Results Performance criteria were categorized along several dimensions: int ernal measures (quality, productivity, innovation, learning, and developmen t), customer satisfaction, market share, and financial indices (cost and pr ofitability), A "report card" was proposed to allow the assessment of resea rch in an individual department or division. Conclusions The department's business strategy can no longer be divorced fr om its research strategy. Alignment between research and clinical goals wil l maximize the department's objectives but will create the need to modify e xisting hierarchical structures and reward systems, Such alignment appears to be the best way to ensure the success of surgical research in the future .