Literature DB >> 24022440

The comparative effectiveness of surgeons over interventionalists in endovascular repairs of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Brandon A McCutcheon1, Mark A Talamini, David C Chang, John A Rose, Dennis F Bandyk, Samuel E Wilson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Comparative effectiveness research has mostly been focused on comparison of treatment techniques. The goal of the present study was to extend the research to physician specialty.
BACKGROUND: Both surgeons and interventionalists (cardiologists and radiologists) are involved in endovascular repairs (EVAR) of aortic aneurysms, with different residency education, operative experience, preoperative assessment and patient selection, and postoperative continuity of care.
METHODS: Retrospective analysis was performed using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 1998 to 2009. Patients undergoing EVAR for abdominal aortic aneurysm were identified with International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, procedure code 39.71. Using physician identifiers available in the database, surgeons were identified by case experience in the same calendar year with elective open AAA repairs, arteriovenous fistula repairs, or carotid endarderectomy. Multivariate analysis adjusted for physician volume, AAA ruptured status, patient demographic and comorbidities, and hospital characteristics.
RESULTS: A total of 28,094 EVARs were analyzed. Unadjusted mortality rates, length of stay, and total hospital charges were significantly higher for patients treated by interventionalists than those by surgeons (all Ps < 0.001). This difference persisted on multivariate analysis, where interventionalists were associated with increased likelihood of mortality (odds ratio = 1.39; 95% confidence interval, 1.04-1.89), longer length of stay (1.32 days; 95% confidence interval, 1.03-1.62), and higher total hospital charges ($19,312; 95% confidence interval, 16,471-22,153).
CONCLUSIONS: Physician specialty is associated with patient outcomes. Surgeons are associated with improved outcomes, with lower mortality, shorter length of stay, and lower charges for EVAR cases, when compared with interventionalists. This finding has significant implications for future comparative effectiveness research and potential policy changes in patient referrals or physician admitting privileges.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24022440     DOI: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3182a196b5

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


  5 in total

Review 1.  Comparative effectiveness research in hand surgery.

Authors:  Shepard P Johnson; Kevin C Chung
Journal:  Hand Clin       Date:  2014-06-06       Impact factor: 1.907

2.  Expanding our understanding of patient outcomes: the unique role of health services research in the continuing evolution of surgical science.

Authors:  Taylor M Coe; John A Rose; David C Chang
Journal:  Vasc Endovascular Surg       Date:  2014-01-19       Impact factor: 1.089

3.  Characterizing endovascular aortic intervention outcomes for nonruptured aortic aneurysms by physician specialty.

Authors:  Andres Guerra; Joe M Feinglass; Matthew C Chia; Ashley K Vavra
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2022-01-26       Impact factor: 3.982

4.  Spine surgeon specialty differences in single-level percutaneous kyphoplasty.

Authors:  Kejia Hu; Motao Liu; Amy J Wang; Gexin Zhao; Yuhao Sun; Chaoqun Yang; Yiwang Zhang; Matthew M Hutter; Dehong Feng; Bomin Sun; Ziv Williams
Journal:  BMC Surg       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 2.102

5.  The endovascular performance spectrum of vascular surgery departments in Germany: Results of an online survey among senior department physicians.

Authors:  T Schmitz-Rixen; G Torsello; M Steinbauer; R T Grundmann
Journal:  Gefasschirurgie       Date:  2016-08-03
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.