Literature DB >> 15465942

Does it matter what a hospital is "high volume" for? Specificity of hospital volume-outcome associations for surgical procedures: analysis of administrative data.

D R Urbach1, N N Baxter.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the improved outcome of a surgical procedure in high volume hospitals is specific to the volume of the same procedure. DESIGN AND
SETTING: Analysis of secondary data in Ontario, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Patients having an oesophagectomy, colorectal resection for cancer, pancreaticoduodenectomy, major lung resection for cancer, or repair of an unruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm between 1994 and 1999. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Odds ratio for death within 30 days of surgery in relation to the hospital volume of the same surgical procedure and the hospital volume of the other four procedures. Estimates were adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidity and accounted for hospital level clustering.
RESULTS: With the exception of colorectal resection, 30 day mortality seemed to be inversely related not only to the hospital volume of the same procedure but also to the hospital volume of most of the other procedures. In some cases the effect of the volume of a different procedure was stronger than the effect of the volume of the same procedure. For example, the association of mortality from pancreaticoduodenectomy with hospital volume of lung resection (odds ratio for death in hospitals with a high volume of lung resection compared with low volume 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.23 to 0.57) was much stronger than the association of mortality from pancreaticoduodenectomy with hospital volume of pancreaticoduodenectomy (0.76, 0.44 to 1.32).
CONCLUSION: The inverse association between high volume of procedure and risk of operative death is not specific to the volume of the procedure being studied.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15465942      PMCID: PMC1743878          DOI: 10.1136/qhc.13.5.379

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care        ISSN: 1475-3898


  22 in total

1.  Volume and outcome--it is time to move ahead.

Authors:  Arnold M Epstein
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-04-11       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature.

Authors:  Ethan A Halm; Clara Lee; Mark R Chassin
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-09-17       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  Adapting a clinical comorbidity index for use with ICD-9-CM administrative databases.

Authors:  R A Deyo; D C Cherkin; M A Ciol
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 6.437

4.  A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation.

Authors:  M E Charlson; P Pompei; K L Ales; C R MacKenzie
Journal:  J Chronic Dis       Date:  1987

5.  Does practice make perfect? Part II: The relation between volume and outcomes and other hospital characteristics.

Authors:  A B Flood; W R Scott; W Ewy
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1984-02       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Selection bias in the referral of patients and the natural history of surgical conditions.

Authors:  L J Melton
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  1985-12       Impact factor: 7.616

7.  The volume-outcome relationship: practice-makes-perfect or selective-referral patterns?

Authors:  H S Luft; S S Hunt; S C Maerki
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1987-06       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Hospital volume influences outcome in patients undergoing pancreatic resection for cancer.

Authors:  R E Glasgow; S J Mulvihill
Journal:  West J Med       Date:  1996-11

9.  Does practice make perfect? Part I: The relation between hospital volume and outcomes for selected diagnostic categories.

Authors:  A B Flood; W R Scott; W Ewy
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1984-02       Impact factor: 2.983

10.  Referral selection bias in the Medicare hospital mortality prediction model: are centers of referral for Medicare beneficiaries necessarily centers of excellence?

Authors:  D J Ballard; S C Bryant; P C O'Brien; D W Smith; M B Pine; D A Cortese
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 3.402

View more
  21 in total

Review 1.  The reporting of randomized clinical trials using a surgical intervention is in need of immediate improvement: a systematic review.

Authors:  Isabelle Jacquier; Isabelle Boutron; David Moher; Carine Roy; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 12.969

2.  Centralisation of complex pathologies in honours of excellence. How to do it?

Authors:  J Escrig Sos
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 3.405

3.  Frequency with which surgeons undertake pancreaticoduodenectomy continues to determine length of stay, hospital charges, and in-hospital mortality.

Authors:  Alexander Rosemurgy; Sarah Cowgill; Brian Coe; Ashley Thomas; Sam Al-Saadi; Steven Goldin; Emmanuel Zervos
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2007-12-22       Impact factor: 3.452

4.  Neglected external validity in reports of randomized trials: the example of hip and knee osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Nizar Ahmad; Isabelle Boutron; David Moher; Isabelle Pitrou; Carine Roy; Philippe Ravaud
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  2009-03-15

5.  Defining the volume-quality debate: is it the surgeon, the center, or the training?

Authors:  James Merlino
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-08

6.  Surgical process improvement tools: defining quality gaps and priority areas in gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

Authors:  A C Wei; K S Devitt; M Wiebe; O F Bathe; R S McLeod; D R Urbach
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2014-04       Impact factor: 3.677

7.  Systematic review and a meta-analysis of hospital and surgeon volume/outcome relationships in colorectal cancer surgery.

Authors:  Ya Ruth Huo; Kevin Phan; David L Morris; Winston Liauw
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2017-06

8.  Mortality effects of timing alternatives for hip fracture surgery.

Authors:  Boris Sobolev; Pierre Guy; Katie Jane Sheehan; Lisa Kuramoto; Jason M Sutherland; Adrian R Levy; James A Blair; Eric Bohm; Jason D Kim; Edward J Harvey; Suzanne N Morin; Lauren Beaupre; Michael Dunbar; Susan Jaglal; James Waddell
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2018-08-07       Impact factor: 8.262

9.  Population-based review of the outcomes following hepatic resection in a Canadian health region.

Authors:  Elijah Dixon; Oliver F Bathe; Andrew McKay; Isabelle You; Scot Dowden; David Sadler; Kelly W Burak; J Gregory McKinnon; Walter Miller; Francis R Sutherland
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.089

10.  In-hospital mortality after stomach cancer surgery in Spain and relationship with hospital volume of interventions.

Authors:  Marisa Baré; Joan Cabrol; Jordi Real; Gemma Navarro; Rafel Campo; Carles Pericay; Antonio Sarría
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-08-27       Impact factor: 3.295

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.