BACKGROUND: The influence of hospital-related factors on outcomes following colorectal surgery is not well-established. The aim of our study was to evaluate the relationship between hospital factors on outcomes in surgically managed colorectal cancer patients. METHODS: We performed a 2-year (2014-2015) analysis of the NIS database. Adult (> 18 years) patients who underwent open or laparoscopic colorectal resection were identified using ICD-9 codes. Patients were stratified based on hospital: volume (low vs. high), teaching status, and location (urban vs. rural). Outcome measures were complications and mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: A total of 153,453 patients with CRC were identified of which 35.3% underwent surgical management. Mean age was 69 ± 13 years, 51.6% were female, and 67% were white. Twenty-seven percent of the patients were managed at a high-volume center, 48% at intermediate-volume center while 25% at a low-volume center. Complications and mortality rates were lower in patients who were managed at high-volume centers and urban hospitals, while no difference was noticed based on teaching status. On regression analysis, patients managed at high-volume centers (OR 0.76 [0.56-0.89]) and urban hospitals (OR 0.83 [0.64-0.91]) have lower odds of complications; similarly, high-volume centers (OR 0.79 [0.65-0.90]) and urban facility (OR 0.87 [0.70-0.92]) were associated with lower odds of mortality. However, there was no association between teaching status and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Hospital factors significantly influence outcomes in patients with CRC managed surgically. High-volume centers and urban facilities have relatively better outcomes. Regionalization of care along with the appropriate availability of resources may improve outcomes in patients with CRC. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Observational Study.
BACKGROUND: The influence of hospital-related factors on outcomes following colorectal surgery is not well-established. The aim of our study was to evaluate the relationship between hospital factors on outcomes in surgically managed colorectal cancerpatients. METHODS: We performed a 2-year (2014-2015) analysis of the NIS database. Adult (> 18 years) patients who underwent open or laparoscopic colorectal resection were identified using ICD-9 codes. Patients were stratified based on hospital: volume (low vs. high), teaching status, and location (urban vs. rural). Outcome measures were complications and mortality. Multivariate logistic regression was performed. RESULTS: A total of 153,453 patients with CRC were identified of which 35.3% underwent surgical management. Mean age was 69 ± 13 years, 51.6% were female, and 67% were white. Twenty-seven percent of the patients were managed at a high-volume center, 48% at intermediate-volume center while 25% at a low-volume center. Complications and mortality rates were lower in patients who were managed at high-volume centers and urban hospitals, while no difference was noticed based on teaching status. On regression analysis, patients managed at high-volume centers (OR 0.76 [0.56-0.89]) and urban hospitals (OR 0.83 [0.64-0.91]) have lower odds of complications; similarly, high-volume centers (OR 0.79 [0.65-0.90]) and urban facility (OR 0.87 [0.70-0.92]) were associated with lower odds of mortality. However, there was no association between teaching status and outcomes. CONCLUSION: Hospital factors significantly influence outcomes in patients with CRC managed surgically. High-volume centers and urban facilities have relatively better outcomes. Regionalization of care along with the appropriate availability of resources may improve outcomes in patients with CRC. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, Retrospective Observational Study.
Authors: Kevin G Billingsley; Arden M Morris; Jason A Dominitz; Barbara Matthews; Sharon Dobie; William Barlow; George E Wright; Laura-Mae Baldwin Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2007-01
Authors: A J Hartz; H Krakauer; E M Kuhn; M Young; S J Jacobsen; G Gay; L Muenz; M Katzoff; R C Bailey; A A Rimm Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1989-12-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lydia G M van der Geest; L Bengt van Rijssen; I Quintus Molenaar; Ignace H de Hingh; Bas Groot Koerkamp; Olivier R C Busch; Valery E P P Lemmens; Marc G H Besselink Journal: HPB (Oxford) Date: 2016-02-11 Impact factor: 3.647
Authors: Deborah Schrag; Katherine S Panageas; Elyn Riedel; Lillian Hsieh; Peter B Bach; Jose G Guillem; Colin B Begg Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2003-06 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Emma L Herbach; Bradley D McDowell; Elizabeth A Chrischilles; Benjamin J Miller Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2022-07-06 Impact factor: 2.787
Authors: Alberto Biondi; Maria Cristina Mele; Annamaria Agnes; Laura Lorenzon; Marco Cintoni; Emanuele Rinninella; Giuseppe Marincola; Domenico D'Ugo; Antonio Gasbarrini; Roberto Persiani Journal: BJS Open Date: 2022-01-06
Authors: Felix Walther; Jochen Schmitt; Maria Eberlein-Gonska; Ralf Kuhlen; Peter Scriba; Olaf Schoffer; Martin Roessler Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-07-25 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Vanessa M Welten; Kerollos N Wanis; Arin L Madenci; Adam C Fields; Pamela W Lu; Robert A Malizia; James Yoo; Joel E Goldberg; Jennifer L Irani; Ronald Bleday; Nelya Melnitchouk Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2021-07-21 Impact factor: 3.452