Outcomes vary widely by doctor/surgeon as well, but the medical profession has successfully resisted meaningful measurement of results for many years now.
I found this for hospital-level comparisons (these should be much more accurate due to far larger numbers): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4250275/#!po=2....
However: "Most commonly reported outcome measures have low reliability for differentiating hospital performance."
I have worked countless full arrest codes in the field... countless. Some go a lot better than others, and some are even successful. Most codes are do not end well for the patient whose heart has stopped beating or the drive to breathe has stopped. I can't imagine having stats of the codes we work pushed in our face everyday. There are sooooo many variables that we don't control which would make the whole "measuring" endeavor meaningless to anyone that really cared. From the weight of the patient to the cleanliness of the house are all variables that may or may not matter. Good luck controlling for all that!
I usually look at a doctor's reputation, experience level, education, publication, etc. as signals for "quality." It CAN vary drastically, as in, one doctor might overlook a diagnosis or even mis-diagnose something that another, more experienced doctor would catch correctly.
Tracking revision and mortality rates for surgeons would be much more helpful. I have been told (by engineers who have worked on joint replacements) that some surgeons have revision rates well over 50% (and frequently leave patients with one leg longer than the other), while others have revision rates well under 10%.