• Surgery · Apr 2016

    The relative effect of hospital and surgeon volume on failure to rescue among patients undergoing liver resection for cancer.

    • Stefan Buettner, Faiz Gani, Neda Amini, Gaya Spolverato, Yuhree Kim, Arman Kilic, Doris Wagner, and Timothy M Pawlik.
    • Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins Hospital, Baltimore, MD.
    • Surgery. 2016 Apr 1; 159 (4): 1004-12.

    BackgroundAlthough previous reports have focused on factors at the hospital level to explain variations in postoperative outcomes, less is known regarding the effect of provider-specific factors on postoperative outcomes such as failure-to-rescue (FTR) and postoperative mortality. The current study aimed to quantify the relative contributions of surgeon and hospital volume on the volume-outcomes relationship among a cohort of patients undergoing liver resection.MethodsPatients undergoing liver surgery for cancer were identified using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2001 and 2009. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with mortality and FTR. Point estimates were used to calculate the relative effects of hospital and surgeon volume on mortality and FTR.ResultsA total of 5,075 patients underwent liver surgery and met inclusion criteria. Median patient age was 62 years (interquartile range, 52-70) and 55.2% of patients were male. Mortality was lowest among patients treated at high-volume hospitals and among patients treated by high-volume surgeons (both P < .001). Similar patterns in FTR were noted relative to hospital and surgeon volume (hospital volume: low vs intermediate vs high; 10.3 vs 9.0 vs 5.2%; surgeon volume: low vs intermediate vs high, 11.1 vs 9.1 vs 4.1%; both P < .05). On multivariable analysis, compared with high-volume surgeons, lower volume surgeons demonstrated greater odds for mortality (intermediate: odds ratio [OR], 2.27 [95% CI, 1.27-4.06; P = .006]; low, OR, 2.83 [95% CI, 1.52-5.27; P = .001]), and FTR (intermediate: OR, 2.86 [95% CI, 1.53-5.34, P = .001]; low, OR, 3.40 [95% CI, 1.75-6.63; P < .001]). While hospital volume accounted for 0.5% of the surgeon volume effect on increased FTR for low-volume surgeons, surgeon volume accounted for nearly all of the hospital volume effect on increased FTR in low-volume hospitals.ConclusionThe risk of complications, mortality, and FTR were less among both high-volume hospitals and high-volume surgeons, but the beneficial effect of volume on outcomes was attributable largely to surgeon volume.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.