Literature DB >> 14722145

Procedural volume as a marker of quality for CABG surgery.

Eric D Peterson1, Laura P Coombs, Elizabeth R DeLong, Constance K Haan, T Bruce Ferguson.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: There have been recent calls for using hospital procedural volume as a quality indicator for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, but further research into analysis and policy implication is needed before hospital procedural volume is accepted as a standard quality metric.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the contemporary association between hospital CABG procedure volume and outcome in a large national clinical database. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Observational analysis of 267 089 isolated CABG procedures performed at 439 US hospitals participating in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Cardiac Database between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2001. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Association between hospital CABG procedural volume and all-cause operative mortality (in-hospital or 30-day, whichever was longer).
RESULTS: The median (interquartile range) annual hospital-isolated CABG volume was 253 (165-417) procedures, with 82% of centers performing fewer than 500 procedures per year. The overall operative mortality was 2.66%. After adjusting for patient risk and clustering effects, rates of operative mortality decreased with increasing hospital CABG volume (0.07% for every 100 additional CABG procedures; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-0.99; P =.004). While the association between volume and outcome was statistically significant overall, this association was not observed in patients younger than 65 years or in those at low operative risk and was confounded by surgeon volume. The ability of hospital volume to discriminate those centers with significantly better or worse mortality was limited due to the wide variability in risk-adjusted mortality among hospitals with similar volume. Closure of up to 100 of the lowest-volume centers (ie, those performing < or =150 CABG procedures/year) was estimated to avert fewer than 50 of 7110 (<1% of total) CABG-related deaths.
CONCLUSION: In contemporary practice, hospital procedural volume is only modestly associated with CABG outcomes and therefore may not be an adequate quality metric for CABG surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14722145     DOI: 10.1001/jama.291.2.195

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA        ISSN: 0098-7484            Impact factor:   56.272


  48 in total

1.  The impact of hospital cardiac specialization on outcomes after coronary artery bypass graft surgery: analysis of medicare claims data.

Authors:  Saket Girotra; Xin Lu; Ioana Popescu; Mary Vaughan-Sarrazin; Phillip A Horwitz; Peter Cram
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes       Date:  2010-10-05

2.  Trends in hospital volume and operative mortality for high-risk surgery.

Authors:  Jonathan F Finks; Nicholas H Osborne; John D Birkmeyer
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-06-02       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 3.  Competition in medical services and the quality of care: concepts and history.

Authors:  Mark V Pauly
Journal:  Int J Health Care Finance Econ       Date:  2004-06

4.  Early Postoperative Outcome of Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Report from the Highest-Volume Center in Japan.

Authors:  Kishio Kuroda; Tomoko S Kato; Kenji Kuwaki; Kan Kajimoto; Seitetsu L Lee; Taira Yamamoto; Atsushi Amano
Journal:  Ann Thorac Cardiovasc Surg       Date:  2015-11-24       Impact factor: 1.520

5.  [Position document on quality assurance in invasive cardiology. Are minimum numbers in percutaneous coronary angioplasty evidence based?].

Authors:  A Vogt; Ruth H Strasser
Journal:  Z Kardiol       Date:  2004-10

Review 6.  Shaping the future of surgery: the role of private regulation in determining quality standards.

Authors:  Rachael A Callcut; Tara M Breslin
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 12.969

7.  The CABG surgery volume-outcome relationship: temporal trends and selection effects in California, 1998-2004.

Authors:  James P Marcin; Zhongmin Li; Richard L Kravitz; Jian J Dai; David M Rocke; Patrick S Romano
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Retention, learning by doing, and performance in emergency medical services.

Authors:  Guy David; Tanguy Brachet
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2009-03-05       Impact factor: 3.402

9.  [Minimum provider volumes in heart surgery].

Authors:  H J Geissler; F Beyersdorf
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 0.955

10.  Healthcare quality measurement in orthopaedic surgery: current state of the art.

Authors:  Andrew Auerbach
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-04-21       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.