Literature DB >> 22241647

National trends in oropharyngeal cancer surgery and the effect of surgeon and hospital volume on short-term outcomes and cost of care.

Christine G Gourin1, Kevin D Frick.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: The past 2 decades have witnessed an increase in the use of chemoradiation in the treatment of oropharyngeal cancer. We sought to characterize contemporary patterns of oropharyngeal cancer surgical care and the effect of volume on surgical care and short-term outcomes. STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective cross-sectional study.
METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample database, temporal trends in oropharyngeal cancer surgical care were evaluated in 75,828 cases performed from 1993 through 2008, and relationships between volume and mortality, complications, length of stay, and costs were evaluated in 29,030 cases performed from 2003 through 2008 using regression analysis, adjusting for patient and provider characteristics.
RESULTS: Oropharyngeal cancer surgery from 2001 through 2008 was associated with increased use of high-volume hospitals (odds ratio [OR], 2.2; P = .016); an increase in tonsil (OR, 1.4; P < .001) and tongue base (OR, 1.3; P = .001) tumors; an increase in patients aged 40 to 64 years (OR, 1.5; P < .001); a decrease in partial glossectomy (OR, 0.8; P < .001), pharyngectomy (OR, 0.8; P = .003), mandibulectomy (OR, 0.6; P < .001) and laryngectomy procedures (OR, 0.6; P < .001); and an increase in prior radiation (OR, 1.7; P = .026), advanced comorbidity (OR, 1.4; P = .007), and wound complications (OR, 1.5; P = .029), compared to 1993 through 2000. High-volume hospitals were significantly associated with pharyngectomy (OR, 2.6; P = .001), while high-volume surgeons were associated with flap reconstruction (OR, 1.6; P = .005) and prior radiation (OR, 2.6; P = .013). After controlling for all other variables, a statistically significant interaction was observed between high-volume surgeons and high-volume hospitals, with reduced hospital-related costs for surgery performed by high-volume surgeons at high-volume hospitals.
CONCLUSIONS: These data reflect changing trends in the epidemiology and primary management of oropharyngeal cancer, with meaningful differences in the type of surgical care provided by high-volume providers.
Copyright © 2011 The American Laryngological, Rhinological, and Otological Society, Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22241647     DOI: 10.1002/lary.22447

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Laryngoscope        ISSN: 0023-852X            Impact factor:   3.325


  11 in total

1.  Health Services Research and Regionalization of Care-From Policy to Practice: the Ontario Experience in Head and Neck Cancer.

Authors:  Antoine Eskander; David P Goldstein; Jonathan C Irish
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 5.075

Review 2.  Defining value-driven care in head and neck oncology.

Authors:  Benjamin R Roman; Mahmoud I Awad; Snehal G Patel
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 5.075

3.  Cross-sectional study of variables associated with length of stay and ICU need in open Roux-En-Y gastric bypass surgery for morbid obese patients: an exploratory analysis based on the Public Health System administrative database (Datasus) in Brazil.

Authors:  Elio Fernando Asano; Irineu Rasera; Elisabete Cristina Shiraga
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 4.129

4.  Association of Hospital Volume With Laryngectomy Outcomes in Patients With Larynx Cancer.

Authors:  Christine G Gourin; C Matthew Stewart; Kevin D Frick; Carole Fakhry; Karen T Pitman; David W Eisele; J Matthew Austin
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 6.223

Review 5.  Outcomes measurement in patients with head and neck cancer.

Authors:  Christine G Gourin
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2014-03       Impact factor: 5.075

6.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Elective Neck Dissection in Patients With Clinically Node-Negative Oral Cavity Cancer.

Authors:  Joseph R Acevedo; Katherine E Fero; Bayard Wilson; Assuntina G Sacco; Loren K Mell; Charles S Coffey; James D Murphy
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2016-11-10       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 7.  Is open surgery for head and neck cancers truly declining?

Authors:  Dana M Hartl; Daniel F Brasnu; Jatin P Shah; Michael L Hinni; Robert P Takes; Kerry D Olsen; Luiz P Kowalski; Juan P Rodrigo; Primož Strojan; Gregory T Wolf; Alessandra Rinaldo; Carlos Suárez; William M Mendenhall; Vinidh Paleri; Arlene A Forastiere; Jochen A Werner; Alfio Ferlito
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 2.503

8.  Association of Facility Volume With Positive Margin Rate in the Surgical Treatment of Head and Neck Cancer.

Authors:  Cheryl C Nocon; Gaurav S Ajmani; Mihir K Bhayani
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 6.223

9.  Risk Factors, Causes, and Costs of Hospital Readmission After Head and Neck Cancer Surgery Reconstruction.

Authors:  Alexander N Goel; Govind Raghavan; Maie A St John; Jennifer L Long
Journal:  JAMA Facial Plast Surg       Date:  2019-03-01       Impact factor: 4.611

10.  Characteristics of hospitalized dermatomyositis patients with underlying malignancy: a nationally representative retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Raghav Tripathi; Anthony P Fernandez
Journal:  Arch Dermatol Res       Date:  2020-08-17       Impact factor: 3.017

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.