Sir Keogh also added that "we will lose some surgeons...as a consequence of this endeavour". In addition, he made the point that as those surgeons doing few operations may avoid attempting more under this new regulation, more procedures will be 'passed' between colleagues. The potential advantage is that surgeons will have their work load slightly reduced, enforcing the importance of quality, not quantity when performing surgeries. A heart surgeon himself, even though he is involved heavily in this field, he is adamant that 'this is not going to go away'.
Above: Surgeons performing operation (Wikipedia)
Let us consider the implications of this. The statistics shown for death rates may be physically true, but in the wrong context, they may be misleading. If so, this would provide doctors and governing bodies to make invalid conclusions. It will be important for surgeons to publish all deaths to make the results valid. For example, one particular heart surgeon may have a 'significantly high death rate', however it may be overlooked that he is considered the best in his department, having most extremely difficult operations passed onto him by his colleagues. Currently, most surgeons do publish death rates, and the patient has control on whether they would want an operation from a particular surgeon 'based on their figures'. I believe that there is a danger that patient could make poor decisions from these statistics alone, for reasons above, and that they may overlook the expertise and experience of a surgeon. Therefore it is important other factors are considered and presented to the patient for them to make a fully informed decision.
Credit to Ben Tufft for his article 'NHS Medical Director: Surgeons must publish death rates', published in The Independent, 16th November 2014. The full article can be seen here