Literature DB >> 21422913

Esophagectomy outcomes at low-volume hospitals: the association between systems characteristics and mortality.

Luke M Funk1, Atul A Gawande, Marcus E Semel, Stuart R Lipsitz, William R Berry, Michael J Zinner, Ashish K Jha.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between systems characteristics and esophagectomy mortality at low-volume hospitals
BACKGROUND: High-volume hospitals have lower esophagectomy mortality rates, but receiving care at such centers is not always feasible. We examined low-volume hospitals and sought to identify characteristics of those with better outcomes.
METHODS: Using national data from Medicare and the American Hospital Association, we studied 4498 elderly patients who underwent an esophagectomy from 2004 to 2007. We divided hospitals into terciles based on esophagectomy volume and examined characteristics of patients and hospitals (size, nurse ratios, and presence of advanced medical, surgical, and radiological services). Our primary outcome was mortality. We identified 5 potentially beneficial systems characteristics in our data set and used multivariable logistic regression to determine whether these characteristics were associated with lower mortality rates at low-volume hospitals.
RESULTS: Of the 874 hospitals that performed esophagectomies, 83% (723) were low-volume hospitals whereas only 3% (25) were high-volume. Low-volume hospitals performed a median of 1 esophagectomy during the 4-year study period and cared for patients that were older, more likely to be minority, and more likely to have multiple comorbidities compared with high-volume centers. Low-volume hospitals that had at least 3 of 5 characteristics (high nurse ratios, lung transplantation services, complex medical oncology services, bariatric surgery services, and positron emission tomography scanners) had markedly lower mortality rates compared with low-volume hospitals with none of these characteristics (12.5% vs. 5.0%; P value = 0.042).
CONCLUSIONS: Low-volume hospitals with certain systems characteristics seem to achieve better esophagectomy outcomes. A more comprehensive study of the beneficial characteristics of low-volume hospitals is warranted because high-volume hospitals are difficult to access for many patients. @ 2011 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21422913      PMCID: PMC7065506          DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318213862f

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg        ISSN: 0003-4932            Impact factor:   12.969


  32 in total

1.  Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States.

Authors:  John D Birkmeyer; Andrea E Siewers; Emily V A Finlayson; Therese A Stukel; F Lee Lucas; Ida Batista; H Gilbert Welch; David E Wennberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2002-04-11       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Volume thresholds and hospital characteristics in the United States.

Authors:  Anne Elixhauser; Claudia Steiner; Irene Fraser
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.301

3.  Longitudinal data analysis for discrete and continuous outcomes.

Authors:  S L Zeger; K Y Liang
Journal:  Biometrics       Date:  1986-03       Impact factor: 2.571

4.  The relation between surgical volume and mortality: an exploration of causal factors and alternative models.

Authors:  H S Luft
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1980-09       Impact factor: 2.983

5.  Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality.

Authors:  H S Luft; J P Bunker; A C Enthoven
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1979-12-20       Impact factor: 91.245

6.  Variations in referral patterns to high-volume centers for pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  David C Chang; Yiyi Zhang; Debraj Mukherjee; Christopher L Wolfgang; Richard D Schulick; John L Cameron; Nita Ahuja
Journal:  J Am Coll Surg       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 6.113

7.  Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery.

Authors:  C B Begg; L D Cramer; W J Hoskins; M F Brennan
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1998-11-25       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  The impact of provider volume on mortality after intracranial tumor resection.

Authors:  John A Cowan; Justin B Dimick; Jean-Christophe Leveque; B Gregory Thompson; Gilbert R Upchurch; Julian T Hoff
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2003-01       Impact factor: 4.654

9.  Postoperative mortality after esophagectomy for cancer: development of a preoperative risk prediction model.

Authors:  Jin Ra; E Carter Paulson; John Kucharczuk; Katrina Armstrong; Christopher Wirtalla; Rachel Rapaport-Kelz; Larry R Kaiser; Francis R Spitz
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2008-04-01       Impact factor: 5.344

10.  Centralization of cancer surgery: implications for patient access to optimal care.

Authors:  Karyn B Stitzenberg; Elin R Sigurdson; Brian L Egleston; Russell B Starkey; Neal J Meropol
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2009-08-31       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  26 in total

1.  Quality measurement and improvement in general surgery.

Authors:  Marisa Cevasco; Stanley W Ashley
Journal:  Perm J       Date:  2011

2.  Modeling the cost-effectiveness of strategies for treating esophageal adenocarcinoma and high-grade dysplasia.

Authors:  Louisa G Gordon; Nicholas G Hirst; George C Mayne; David I Watson; Timothy Bright; Wang Cai; Andrew P Barbour; Bernard M Smithers; David C Whiteman; Simon Eckermann
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 3.452

3.  Perioperative outcomes of esophageal cancer surgery in a mid-volume institution in the era of centralization.

Authors:  Silvio Däster; Savas D Soysal; Luca Koechlin; Lea Stoll; Ralph Peterli; Markus von Flüe; Christoph Ackermann
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-07-19       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 4.  Enhancing surgical performance outcomes through process-driven care: a systematic review.

Authors:  Philip H Pucher; Rajesh Aggarwal; Pritam Singh; Ara Darzi
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 3.352

5.  Hospital Volume and Operative Mortality for General Surgery Operations Performed Emergently in Adults.

Authors:  Robert D Becher; Michael P DeWane; Nitin Sukumar; Marilyn J Stolar; Thomas M Gill; Adrian A Maung; Kevin M Schuster; Kimberly A Davis
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2019-02-08       Impact factor: 12.969

Review 6.  Training in therapeutic endoscopy: meeting present and future challenges.

Authors:  John Anderson; Melanie Lockett
Journal:  Frontline Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-02-12

7.  Potential impact of a volume pledge on spatial access: A population-level analysis of patients undergoing pancreatectomy.

Authors:  Zhi Ven Fong; Andrew P Loehrer; Carlos Fernández-Del Castillo; Yanik J Bababekov; Ginger Jin; Cristina R Ferrone; Andrew L Warshaw; Lara N Traeger; Matthew M Hutter; Keith D Lillemoe; David C Chang
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2017-05-11       Impact factor: 3.982

8.  Quality of care and patient outcomes in critical access rural hospitals.

Authors:  Karen E Joynt; Yael Harris; E John Orav; Ashish K Jha
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 9.  Safety in the operating theatre--a transition to systems-based care.

Authors:  Thomas G Weiser; Michael P Porter; Ronald V Maier
Journal:  Nat Rev Urol       Date:  2013-02-19       Impact factor: 14.432

10.  Characterizing the role of a high-volume cancer resection ecosystem on low-volume, high-quality surgical care.

Authors:  Anai N Kothari; Barbara A Blanco; Sarah A Brownlee; Ann E Evans; Victor A Chang; Gerard J Abood; Raffaella Settimi; Daniela S Raicu; Paul C Kuo
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 3.982

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.