Literature DB >> 7746056

Influence of clinician workload and patterns of treatment on survival from breast cancer.

R Sainsbury1, B Haward, L Rider, C Johnston, C Round.   

Abstract

Chemotherapy and hormone therapy prolong disease-free and overall survival for patients with breast cancer in the clinical-trial setting, but it is not clear if this translates into a benefit on a population basis. It is also not clear if surgical caseload has any influence on survival. We used cancer-registry data from 12,861 patients with breast cancer treated in Yorkshire, UK, between 1979 and 1988, and found that patients of surgeons with higher rates of usage of chemotherapy and hormone therapy (regional mean usage 9.3%, range 0-46%) had prolonged survival. There was considerable variation in survival of breast cancer patients between surgeons, but their rate of use of chemotherapy and hormone therapy explained about 26% of this survival variation. Had the practice of the surgeons with the better outcomes been used by all treating clinicians, 5-year survival would have increased by about 4-5%. Examination of differences in survival as a function of consultant caseload demonstrated poorer results amongst those surgeons treating less than 30 new cases of breast cancer per year (risk ratio [95% CI] for treating > 30 compared with < 10 = 0.85 [0.77-0.93]). We recommend that patients with breast cancer be dealt with only by clinicians who see more than 30 new cases per year and who have a full range of treatment options available within a multidisciplinary setting.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1995        PMID: 7746056     DOI: 10.1016/s0140-6736(95)90924-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  84 in total

1.  Cancer survival in Britain is poorer than that of her comparable European neighbours.

Authors:  K Sikora
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1999-08-21

2.  Optimum treatment for young women with breast cancer needs to be determined.

Authors:  R Sainsbury; B Haward
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2000-07-01

Review 3.  Volume of clinical activity in hospitals and healthcare outcomes, costs, and patient access.

Authors:  A Sowden; V Aletras; M Place; N Rice; A Eastwood; R Grilli; B Ferguson; J Posnett; T Sheldon
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1997-06

4.  Observational study of type of surgical training and outcome of definitive surgery for primary malignant melanoma.

Authors:  Rona M MacKie; Caroline A Bray; David J Hole
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2002-11-30

5.  The volume-outcome relationship in cancer surgery: a hard sell.

Authors:  Ingemar Ihse
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  The relation of volume with outcome in phacoemulsification surgery.

Authors:  M Habib; K Mandal; C V Bunce; S G Fraser
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2004-05       Impact factor: 4.638

7.  Oncoplastic multidisciplinary meetings: a necessity or luxury?

Authors:  Jennifer E Rusby; Jenny Gough; Paul A Harris; Fiona A MacNeill
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 1.891

Review 8.  Management of primary breast cancer.

Authors:  A Melville; A Liberati; R Grilli; T Sheldon
Journal:  Qual Health Care       Date:  1996-12

Review 9.  Outcomes in oncologic surgery: does volume make a difference?

Authors:  David J Bentrem; Murray F Brennan
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.352

10.  Relationship between number of breast cancer operations performed and 5-year survival after treatment for early-stage breast cancer.

Authors:  Mary Ann Gilligan; Joan Neuner; Xu Zhang; Rodney Sparapani; Purushottam W Laud; Ann B Nattinger
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2007-01-31       Impact factor: 9.308

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.