We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Comment & Response |

Failure to Rescue

Jeffrey H. Silber, MD, PhD1,2,3,4
[+] Author Affiliations
1Center for Outcomes Research, Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
2Departments of Pediatrics and of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia
3Department of Health Care Management, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
4Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia
JAMA Surg. 2014;149(7):747-748. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2014.589.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


To the Editor Gonzalez et al1 report that failure-to-rescue (FTR) rates in cardiovascular surgery were lower (better) in high-volume hospitals than in low-volume hospitals. This is an important finding consistent with a large body of literature on FTR rates that has already shown its association with numerous hospital and staffing characteristics.25 However, unlike the traditional measure of FTR rates,2,4 Gonzalez et al1 did not count every death of a patient undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). As reported, 75 391 of 119 434 patients (63%) in their study1 were admitted for CABG, and among these patients, those who experienced an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (before or after surgery) and subsequently died were not counted as a death, and therefore excluded from their FTR analysis. Apparently, Gonzalez et al1 have chosen not to count deaths (and their associated failures) because they did not consider an AMI a reliable complication—they had difficulty using Medicare Provider Analysis and Review data to determine whether the AMI occurred before or after surgery. Nowhere in their article or eTable is the total number of CABG patients with AMI reported, nor is the number of deaths ultimately excluded from the FTR analysis reported. From the perspective of any clinical trial reporting survival, the exclusion of a death because of measurement problems related to a complication prior to that death would be highly suspect. This exclusion should also be considered suspect when evaluating the FTR rate. To confirm the stability of their findings, Gonzalez et al1 should have provided a full account of (1) all deaths (not just patients who died without an AMI complication); (2) all patients with complications (including those who had an AMI); and (3) the FTR rate based on all patients. Such an analysis would be consistent with the original FTR theory24 that includes all deaths; a complete description of the construction of the FTR measure is available in the literature.4 It is difficult to imagine any theory, in any medical or surgical context, that would advocate the exclusion of known deaths based on a perceived difficulty in the measurement of complications. If the exclusion of deaths is due to the inadequacy of the available data set for a CABG analysis, then possibly a different data set should have been used (as was done in a previous analysis of death, complication, and FTR among CABG patients published in JAMA3).


Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





July 1, 2014
Philip H. Pucher, MD, MRCS; Rajesh Aggarwal, MD, PhD, MA, FRCS
1Department of Surgery and Cancer, Imperial College London, St Mary’s Hospital, London, England
2Department of Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia
JAMA Surg. 2014;149(7):747. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2014.586.
July 1, 2014
Amir A. Ghaferi, MD, MS; Andrew A. Gonzalez, MD, JD, MPH
1Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
1Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor2Department of Surgery, University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System, Chicago
JAMA Surg. 2014;149(7):748-749. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2014.592.
Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...