Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München - Stammgelände

Quality results

Treatment sector: Pancreas and pancreas-kidney transplantation (NET-PNTX) Explanation

Information about this treatment area (documentation)

Designation	Nieren- und Pankreas- (Nieren-) transplantation
Shortcut	PNTX
Number of cases	50
Documentation rate	100 %
Hospital comment	Die Dokumentationsrate wurde krankenhausbezogen berechnet.

Summary result:

In 2 of 2 quality characteristics, the quality objective was achieved.
No assessment is possible for one quality characteristic

Number of patients treated: 50

Quality objective achieved
Quality objective not achieved

The results in detail

Show national result

Quality criterion

Hospital result
and target area

Quality objective
achieved?

All information

This is how rarely patients die in hospital during or after transplantation

Hospital: 0,00 %

Target area: at most 5,00 %

Quality objective achieved

Click here

So often the transplanted organ was functioning well enough at discharge that the patients no longer needed insulin.

Hospital: 66,67 %

Target area: at least 75,00 %

Assessment not possible

Click here

So rarely did the transplanted organ have to be removed again due to complications

Hospital: Data protection

No information due to data protection

Target area: at most 20,00 %

Quality objective achieved
Why?

Click here

Code ID	572036
Result (%)	0,00
Evaluation through structured dialogue	The result is in the target area - the quality target is therefore considered to have been fully achieved. (R10)
Population	6
Events observed	0
Anticipated events	0,00
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	unverändert
Comparison with the previous reporting year	unverändert
National result (%)	4,76
Target range (reference range)	<= 5,00 %
Confidence interval nationwide (%)	2,05 - 10,67
Hospital confidence interval (%)	0,00 - 39,03
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	DeQS
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG The reference range indicates the results at which a facility can be assumed to provide good quality of care, although deviations are possible. The reference range thus establishes a benchmark for the evaluation of facilities. A result outside the reference range is initially considered conspicuous. This usually entails an analysis by means of a statement procedure. It should be noted that a quality result outside the reference range is not synonymous with a lack of quality of the facility in the quality aspect considered here. The deviation can also be due, for example, to incorrect documentation, medical specificity of the patient collective or individual cases. The evaluation of quality is carried out within the framework of the defined procedure in the comments procedure. More detailed information on reference areas can be found at the following link: https://iqtig.org/das-iqtig/grundlagen/methodische-grundlagen.

Code ID	572043
Result (%)	66,67
Evaluation through structured dialogue	An evaluation is not possible. For more information, see All information (click here) at the bottom under Comment or Technical note. (S99)
Population	6
Events observed	4
Anticipated events	0,00
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	unverändert
Comparison with the previous reporting year	eingeschränkt/nicht vergleichbar
National result (%)	80,00
Target range (reference range)	>= 75,00 %
Confidence interval nationwide (%)	71,12 - 86,66
Hospital confidence interval (%)	30,00 - 90,32
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	DeQS
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level	Beide Fälle führten auch zur Entfernung des Transplantats und werden im QI 572047 evaluiert
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG The reference range indicates the results at which a facility can be assumed to provide good quality of care, although deviations are possible. The reference range thus establishes a benchmark for the evaluation of facilities. A result outside the reference range is initially considered conspicuous. This usually entails an analysis by means of a statement procedure. It should be noted that a quality result outside the reference range is not synonymous with a lack of quality of the facility in the quality aspect considered here. The deviation can also be due, for example, to incorrect documentation, medical specificity of the patient collective or individual cases. The evaluation of quality is carried out within the framework of the defined procedure in the comments procedure. More detailed information on reference areas can be found at the following link: https://iqtig.org/das-iqtig/grundlagen/methodische-grundlagen.

Code ID	572047
Result (%)	Data protection
Evaluation through structured dialogue	Although the result is not in the target area, the quality target is still considered to have been achieved. For more information, see All information (click here) at the bottom under Comment or Technical note. (U99)
Population	Data protection
Events observed	Data protection
Anticipated events	Data protection
Result trend compared with the previous reporting year	unverändert
Comparison with the previous reporting year	unverändert
National result (%)	20,95
Target range (reference range)	<= 20,00 %
Confidence interval nationwide (%)	14,26 - 29,69
Hospital confidence interval (%)	0,00 - 0,00
Reference infection	No
Type of value	QI
Relation to the procedure	DeQS
Reference to other QA results
Sorting
Risk-adjusted rate
Comments/explanations by the competent authority at national or state level	Dem Krankenhaus wurden Hinweise zu möglichen Verbesserungspotenzialen gegeben.
Comments/explanations by the hospital
Specialist note IQTIG Although indicators represent quality, their results do not allow a direct assessment of the quality of care (due to the lack of a reference range) and they are not suitable for direct quality comparisons (due to the lack of mathematical adjustment). However, they are usually published in direct connection with a quality indicator, the results of which are supplemented by the indicator values (imputed and supplementary indicators). They thus contribute to an increase in the comprehensibility of the quality results. The transparency indicators, which are to be distinguished from these, represent aspects of care for which there are no quality indicators, but which are nevertheless important for presenting the quality of care. More detailed information on ratios can be found at the following link: https://iqtig.org/veroeffentlichungen/kennzahlenkonzept.