The Role of Surgical Margins as Outcome Metrics in a Quality Assurance Program for Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy
Clicks: 3
ID: 314883
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
0.6
/100
3 views
1 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #70 of 106 articles by views in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract Background Positive surgical margins (PSMs) serve as outcome metrics after robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) and are frequently used in quality assurance programs (QAPs). Despite their central role as a quality indicator, the prognostic significance of PSMs remains debated, and limited research examines how clinicians actually interpret and use this metric within QAPs. This qualitative study explores how urologists collectively interpret and use PSM metrics within a regional prostate cancer QAP and considers the implications for quality improvement and clinical collaboration. Methods We conducted a qualitative study examining how urologists interpret and use PSMs within the Prostate Cancer Network Netherlands. We audio-recorded 12 monthly QAP meetings and completed structured fieldnotes. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with all six participating RARP urologists. Transcripts and fieldnotes were analyzed using the Gioia-method. Results PSMs operated in three interconnected ways within QAPs. First, as quality improvement instruments: they shaped clinical interpretation by helping urologists balance oncological control and functional outcomes, while supporting peer learning, knowledge sharing, and alignment across hospitals. Second, as vehicles of professional legitimation: they helped justify QAP to administrators, patients, and peer institutions. Third, as instruments of power and positioning: they enabled professional differentiation and ranking but were contested in their definition, sometimes reinforcing hierarchy or competition. Across all three themes, PSMs were not neutral outcome metrics but active forces shaping quality assurance practices and professional relations. Conclusion Understanding how PSMs operate in practice reveals their multifaceted role beyond quality measurement, where they could simultaneously serve as tools for clinical interpretation, legitimation vehicles, and instruments of professional power.
| Reference Key |
openalex_W7162329318
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Sophia H. van der Graaf, B. Becker, Suze L van der Aa, Pim J van Leeuwen, R Jeroen A van Moorselaar, Jakko A. Nieuwenhuijzen, Ton A. Roeleveld, André N. Vis, Esther M K Wit, Sierk Ybema, Henk G van der Poel |
| Journal | International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.1093/intqhc/mzag069
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.