Alexandra W Acher1, Sharon M Weber1, Timothy M Pawlik2. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA. 2. Department of Surgery, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, The James Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, OH, USA. Tim.Pawlik@osumc.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Increasing hospital or surgeon volume is associated with improved outcomes among patients with pancreatic cancer. Promotion of regionalized care is based on this volume-outcome association. However, other research has exposed nuances and complexities inherent to this association that should be considered when promoting regionalized care models. We herein provide a critical review of the literature on the volume-outcome association and a discussion of areas of ongoing controversy. METHODS: A PubMed literature search was conducted for the years 1995-2020. Peer reviewed original research studies were selected for critical review based on study design, potential to draw meaningful conclusions from the data, and discussion of current knowledge gaps. RESULTS: Based on the cumulative published literature, hospital/surgeon volume and patient mortality are inversely related. However, it remains unclear whether volume is a proxy for other more causative variables inherent in high-volume centers. Interpretation of the volume-outcome association is made more difficult to interpret due to the large variation in the definition of high volume, difficulty in isolating the individual impact of surgeon versus hospital volume, challenges in quantifying health system processes related to volume, and the fact that some low-volume centers consistently achieve excellent clinical results. Implementation of true regionalized care models has been rare, likely reflecting both health system and patient level challenges. CONCLUSION: The volume-outcome association has been consistently demonstrated to be important to the care of patients with pancreas cancer. The underlying mechanism of this association to explain the overall benefit is likely multifactorial. Better understanding of what drives the volume-outcome association may increase access to optimized care for a broader range of hospital systems and patients.
INTRODUCTION: Increasing hospital or surgeon volume is associated with improved outcomes among patients with pancreatic cancer. Promotion of regionalized care is based on this volume-outcome association. However, other research has exposed nuances and complexities inherent to this association that should be considered when promoting regionalized care models. We herein provide a critical review of the literature on the volume-outcome association and a discussion of areas of ongoing controversy. METHODS: A PubMed literature search was conducted for the years 1995-2020. Peer reviewed original research studies were selected for critical review based on study design, potential to draw meaningful conclusions from the data, and discussion of current knowledge gaps. RESULTS: Based on the cumulative published literature, hospital/surgeon volume and patient mortality are inversely related. However, it remains unclear whether volume is a proxy for other more causative variables inherent in high-volume centers. Interpretation of the volume-outcome association is made more difficult to interpret due to the large variation in the definition of high volume, difficulty in isolating the individual impact of surgeon versus hospital volume, challenges in quantifying health system processes related to volume, and the fact that some low-volume centers consistently achieve excellent clinical results. Implementation of true regionalized care models has been rare, likely reflecting both health system and patient level challenges. CONCLUSION: The volume-outcome association has been consistently demonstrated to be important to the care of patients with pancreas cancer. The underlying mechanism of this association to explain the overall benefit is likely multifactorial. Better understanding of what drives the volume-outcome association may increase access to optimized care for a broader range of hospital systems and patients.
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
Authors: Marko Simunovic; David Urbach; Diane Major; Rinku Sutradhar; Nancy Baxter; Teresa To; Adalsteinn Brown; Dave Davis; Mark N Levine Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2010-07-13 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Caprice K Christian; Michael L Gustafson; Rebecca A Betensky; Jennifer Daley; Michael J Zinner Journal: World J Surg Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: John D Birkmeyer; Therese A Stukel; Andrea E Siewers; Philip P Goodney; David E Wennberg; F Lee Lucas Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-11-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Antonio Giuliani; Pasquale Avella; Anna Lucia Segreto; Maria Lucia Izzo; Antonio Buondonno; Mariagrazia Coluzzi; Micaela Cappuccio; Maria Chiara Brunese; Roberto Vaschetti; Andrea Scacchi; Germano Guerra; Bruno Amato; Fulvio Calise; Aldo Rocca Journal: Front Surg Date: 2021-12-21
Authors: Benjamin D Powers; James McDonald; Rahul Mhaskar; Simon J Craddock Lee; Jennifer B Permuth; Susan Vadaparampil; Scott M Gilbert; Jason W Denbo; Dae Won Kim; Jose M Pimiento; Pamela J Hodul; Mokenge P Malafa; Daniel A Anaya; Jason B Fleming Journal: Ann Surg Open Date: 2022-08-17