Literature DB >> 29101562

Academic status does not affect outcome following complex hepato-pancreato-biliary procedures.

Maria S Altieri1, Jie Yang2, Donald Groves3, Donglei Yin4, Kristen Cagino3, Mark Talamini3, Aurora Pryor3.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: There is a growing debate regarding outcomes following complex hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) procedures. The purpose of our study is to examine if facility type has any impact on complications, readmission rates, emergency department (ED) visit rates, and length of stay (LOS) for patients undergoing HPB surgery.
METHODS: The SPARCS administrative database was used to identify patients undergoing complex HPB procedures between 2012 and 2014 in New York. Univariate generalized linear mixed models were fit to estimate the marginal association between outcomes such as overall/severe complication rates, 30-day and 1-year readmission rates, 30-day and 1-year ED-visit rates, and potential risk factors. Univariate linear mixed models were used to estimate the marginal association between possible risk factors and LOS. Facility type, as well as any variables found to be significant in our univariate analysis (p = 0.05), was further included in the multivariable regression models.
RESULTS: There were 4122 complex HPB procedures performed. Academic facilities were more likely to have a higher hospital volume (p < 0001). Surgery at academic facilities were less likely to have coexisting comorbidities; however, they were more likely to have metastatic cancer and/or liver disease (p = 0.0114, < 0. 0001, and = 0.0299, respectively). Postoperatively, patients at non-academic facilities experienced higher overall complication rates, and higher severe complication rates, when compared to those at academic facilities (p < 0.0001 and = 0.0018, respectively). Further analysis via adjustment for possible confounding factors, however, revealed no significant difference in the risk of severe complications between the two facility types. Such adjustment also demonstrated higher 30-day readmission risk in patients who underwent their surgery at an academic facility.
CONCLUSION: No significant difference was found when comparing the outcomes of academic and non-academic facilities, after adjusting for age, gender, race, region, insurance, and hospital volume. Patients from academic facilities were more likely to be readmitted within the first 30-days after surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Academic status; Hepato-pancreato-biliary procedures

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29101562     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-017-5931-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  19 in total

1.  Frequency with which surgeons undertake pancreaticoduodenectomy determines length of stay, hospital charges, and in-hospital mortality.

Authors:  A S Rosemurgy; M Bloomston; F M Serafini; B Coon; M M Murr; L C Carey
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2001 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  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

Review 3.  Hospital volume and mortality after pancreatic resection: a systematic review and an evaluation of intervention in the Netherlands.

Authors:  N Tjarda van Heek; Koert F D Kuhlmann; Rob J Scholten; Steve M M de Castro; Olivier R C Busch; Thomas M van Gulik; Huug Obertop; Dirk J Gouma
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Comparison of the outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound based on community hospital versus tertiary academic center settings.

Authors:  Shailendra Singh; Treta Purohit; Elie Aoun; Yatindra Patel; Neil Carleton; Marcia Mitre; Suzanne Morrissey; Manish Dhawan; Shyam Thakkar
Journal:  Dig Dis Sci       Date:  2014-02-27       Impact factor: 3.199

5.  Hospital of diagnosis and likelihood of surgical treatment for pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  M J A M Bakens; Y R B M van Gestel; M Bongers; M G H Besselink; C H C Dejong; I Q Molenaar; O R C Busch; V E P P Lemmens; I H J T de Hingh
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2015-10-05       Impact factor: 6.939

6.  Hospital readmission after a pancreaticoduodenectomy: an emerging quality metric?

Authors:  Zachary J Kastenberg; John M Morton; Brendan C Visser; Jeffrey A Norton; George A Poultsides
Journal:  HPB (Oxford)       Date:  2012-09-24       Impact factor: 3.647

7.  The learning curve in pancreatic surgery.

Authors:  Jennifer F Tseng; Peter W T Pisters; Jeffrey E Lee; Huamin Wang; Henry F Gomez; Charlotte C Sun; Douglas B Evans
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2007-01-22       Impact factor: 3.982

8.  Complex pancreatic surgery: safety and feasibility in the community setting.

Authors:  Ronald S Chamberlain; Matthew Tichauer; Zachary Klaassen; Prakash R Paragi
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 3.452

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

Authors:  D R Urbach; N N Baxter
Journal:  Qual Saf Health Care       Date:  2004-10

10.  Surgeon volume impacts hospital mortality for pancreatic resection.

Authors:  Robert W Eppsteiner; Nicholas G Csikesz; James T McPhee; Jennifer F Tseng; Shimul A Shah
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 12.969

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.