scholarly journals What underlies the observed hospital volume-outcome relationship?

2022 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marius Huguet ◽  
Xavier Joutard ◽  
Isabelle Ray-Coquard ◽  
Lionel Perrier

Abstract Background Studies of the hospital volume-outcome relationship have highlighted that a greater volume activity improves patient outcomes. While this finding has been known for years, most studies to date have failed to delve into what underlies this relationship. Objective This study aimed to shed light on the basis of the hospital volume effect on patient outcomes by comparing treatment modalities for epithelial ovarian carcinoma patients. Data An exhaustive dataset of 355 patients in first-line treatment for Epithelial Ovarian Carcinoma (EOC) in 2012 in three regions of France was used. These regions account for 15% of the metropolitan French population. Methods In the presence of endogeneity induced by a reverse causality between hospital volume and patient outcomes, we used an instrumental variable approach. Hospital volume of activity was instrumented by the distance from patients’ homes to their hospital, the population density, and the median net income of patient municipalities. Results Based on our parameter estimates, we found that the rate of complete tumor resection would increase by 15.5 percentage points with centralized care, and by 8.3 percentage points if treatment decisions were coordinated by high-volume centers compared to decentralized care. Conclusion As volume alone is an imperfect correlate of quality, policy-makers need to know what volume is a proxy for in order to devise volume-based policies.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cécile Payet ◽  
Stéphanie Polazzi ◽  
Jean-Christophe Lifante ◽  
Eddy Cotte ◽  
Daniel Grinberg ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The more frequent a hospital performs a procedure, the better the outcome of the procedure; however, the mechanisms of this volume-outcome relationship have not been deeply elucidated to date. We aimed to determine whether patient outcomes improve in hospitals with a significantly increased volume of high-risk surgery over time and whether a learning effect existed at the individual hospital level. Methods We included all patients who underwent one of ten digestive, cardiovascular and orthopaedic procedures between 2010 and 2014 from the French nationwide hospitals database. For each procedure, we identified three groups of hospitals according to volume trend (increased, decreased, or no change). In-hospital mortality, reoperation, and unplanned hospital readmission within 30 days were compared between groups using Cox regressions, taking into account clustering of patients within hospitals and potential confounders. Learning effect was investigated by considering the interaction between hospital groups and procedure year. Results Over 5 years, 759,928 patients from 694 hospitals were analysed. Patients’ mortality in hospitals with procedure volume increase or decrease over time did not clearly differ from those in hospitals with unchanged volume across the studied procedures (e.g., Hazard Ratios [95%] of 1.04 [0.93-1.17] and 1.08 [0.97-1.21] respectively for colectomy). Furthermore, patient outcomes did not improve or deteriorate in hospitals with increased or decreased volume of procedures over time (e.g., 1.01 [0.95-1.08] and 0.99 [0.92-1.05] respectively for colectomy). Conclusions Trend in hospital volume over time does not appear to influence patient outcomes, which puts the relevance of the "practice-makes-perfect" dogma in question.


Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 266-266
Author(s):  
Ronald S. Go ◽  
Mohammed Al-Hamadani ◽  
Cynthia S Crowson ◽  
Nilay D Shah ◽  
Elizabeth B Habermann

Abstract Background: Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) is a relatively uncommon cancer with annual incidence of ~70,000 cases but with over 50 distinct subtypes. The goal of this study was to determine the extent to which the number of NHL patients treated annually in a facility (facility volume) affects overall survival (OS). This study used the National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), a nationwide oncology database covering 70% of the US cancer population, to address this question. Methods: We used the NCDB to identify patients with NHL diagnosed from 1998 to 2006. Year 2006 was used as a cut-off in order to allow a minimum of five years of follow-up for all patients. Only patients treated at facilities with continuous annual reporting to NCDB were included. We classified treatment facilities by quartiles based on facility volume (mean patients/year): Quartile 1 (Q1: 2-13), Quartile 2 (Q2: 14-20), Quartile 3 (Q3: 21-32) and Quartile 4 (Q4: ≥33). We used Pearson correlation methods to examine collinearity, unadjusted Kaplan-Meier methods to estimate OS rates, log rank test to compare survival distributions, and multivariable Cox proportional hazards model to examine the associations between hospital volume and OS adjusting for other covariates of interest. We also included random effects for hospital to more fully adjust for clustering of outcomes within hospitals. To examine non-linear effects of hospital volume, we utilized smoothing splines. Results: There were 278,985 NHL patients cared for at 1,151 facilities. The distribution of patients according to facility volume was Q1 (10.7%), Q2 (13.5%), Q3 (23.3%) and Q4 (52.5%) and according to facility type was academic (31.2%), comprehensive community (55.9%), community (10.6%) and other (2.3%) centers. The unadjusted median OS by facility volume was: Q1: 61.8 months, Q2: 65.9 months, Q3: 71.4 months and Q4: 83.6 months. After multivariable analysis adjusting for demographic (sex, age, race, ethnicity), socioeconomic (income, insurance type), geographic (area of residence), disease-specific (NHL subtype, stage) and facility-specific (type and location) factors, we show that facility volume remains an independent predictor of all-cause mortality. Compared to patients treated at Q4 facilities, patients treated at lower quartile facilities had a worse OS (Q3HR: 1.05 [95% CI, 1.04-1.06]; Q2HR: 1.08 [1.07-1.10]; Q1HR: 1.14 [1.11-1.17]). We adjusted for hospital as a random effect, performed sensitivity analyses removing primary payor and facility type (due to collinearity with age and facility volume, respectively), and adjusted for Charlson-Deyo co-morbidity score (available only for patients diagnosed after 2003) in secondary models and found similar results. Using smoothing splines, we found a significant non-linear effect of hospital volume on OS (P <0.001). This is depicted in the Figure wherein the hazard ratio of 1.0 corresponded to the average predicted hazard, which occurred at a hospital volume of 59 patients per year. Conclusions: Patients who were treated for NHL at higher volume facilities had longer OS than those who were treated at facilities with a lower volume. This is the first study in the US using a national sample to show that a volume-outcome relationship exists in the medical management of cancer. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


Neurosurgery ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 80 (4) ◽  
pp. 534-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aziz S. Alali ◽  
David Gomez ◽  
Victoria McCredie ◽  
Todd G. Mainprize ◽  
Avery B. Nathens

Abstract BACKGROUND: The hospital volume–outcome relationship in severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) population remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between volume of patients with severe TBI per hospital and in-hospital mortality, major complications, and mortality following a major complication (ie, failure to rescue). METHODS: In a multicenter cohort study, data on 9255 adults with severe TBI were derived from 111 hospitals participating in the American College of Surgeons Trauma Quality Improvement Program over 2009-2011. Hospitals were ranked into quartiles based on their volume of severe TBI during the study period. Random-intercept multilevel models were used to examine the association between hospital quartile of severe TBI volume and in-hospital mortality, major complications, and mortality following a major complication after adjusting for patient and hospital characteristics. In sensitivity analyses, we examined these associations after excluding transferred cases. RESULTS: Overall mortality was 37.2% (n = 3447). Two thousand ninety-eight patients (22.7%) suffered from 1 or more major complication. Among patients with major complications, 27.8% (n = 583) died. Higher-volume hospitals were associated with lower mortality; the adjusted odds ratio of death was 0.50 (95% confidence interval: 0.29-0.85) in the highest volume quartile compared to the lowest. There was no significant association between hospital-volume quartile and the odds of a major complication or the odds of death following a major complication. After excluding transferred cases, similar results were found. CONCLUSION: High-volume hospitals might be associated with lower in-hospital mortality following severe TBI. However, this mortality reduction was not associated with lower risk of major complications or death following a major complication.


2017 ◽  
Vol 198 (1) ◽  
pp. 92-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Boris Gershman ◽  
Sarah K. Meier ◽  
Molly M. Jeffery ◽  
Daniel M. Moreira ◽  
Matthew K. Tollefson ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
C. M. Kugler ◽  
K. Goossen ◽  
T. Rombey ◽  
K. K. De Santis ◽  
T. Mathes ◽  
...  

Abstract Purpose This systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis aimed to investigate the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes for total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Methods MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL were searched up to February 2020 for randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that reported TKA performed in hospitals with at least two different volumes and any associated patient-relevant outcomes. The adjusted effect estimates (odds ratios, OR) were pooled using a random-effects, linear dose–response meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I2-statistic. ROBINS-I and the GRADE approach were used to assess the risk of bias and the confidence in the cumulative evidence, respectively. Results A total of 68 cohort studies with data from 1985 to 2018 were included. The risk of bias for all outcomes ranged from moderate to critical. Higher hospital volume may be associated with a lower rate of early revision ≤ 12 months (narrative synthesis of k = 7 studies, n = 301,378 patients) and is likely associated with lower mortality ≤ 3 months (OR = 0.91 per additional 50 TKAs/year, 95% confidence interval [0.87–0.95], k = 9, n = 2,638,996, I2 = 51%) and readmissions ≤ 3 months (OR = 0.98 [0.97–0.99], k = 3, n = 830,381, I2 = 44%). Hospital volume may not be associated with the rates of deep infections within 1–4 years, late revision (1–10 years) or adverse events ≤ 3 months. The confidence in the cumulative evidence was moderate for mortality and readmission rates; low for early revision rates; and very low for deep infection, late revision and adverse event rates. Conclusion An inverse volume–outcome relationship probably exists for some TKA outcomes, including mortality and readmissions, and may exist for early revisions. Small reductions in unfavourable outcomes may be clinically relevant at the population level, supporting centralisation of TKA to high-volume hospitals. Level of evidence III. Registration number The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42019131209 available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=131209).


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 225-225
Author(s):  
Anna Bendzsak ◽  
Nancy N. Baxter ◽  
Gail Darling ◽  
Peter Austin ◽  
David R. Urbach

225 Background: The causal direction of the volume-outcome relationship in surgery has not yet been established. Our objective was to study the effect of absolute hospital volume of anatomic lung resections and volume changes within hospitals on mortality, length of stay (LOS), readmission (RA), and post-discharge visits to the emergency room (ER visits), during a period of regionalization for lung surgery in Ontario, Canada, to test the theory of "practice makes perfect". Methods: For each anatomic lung resection in Ontario from 2004-2010 we determined the volume change within hospital as the difference in hospital operative volume between the year immediately prior to the date of surgery and year prior to that (Dvolume). We used generalized estimating equations and logistic regression, controlling for clustering within hospitals, to examine the effect of Dvolume, patient factors and year on operative mortality, RA and ER visits. Negative binomial regression was used for LOS. The absolute effect of volume, measured as the 12-month hospital volume prior to each procedure, on outcomes was also examined with the same models. Results: Higher hospital volumes were associated with significant improvements in mortality and length of stay, (for increases of 10 cases, mortality OR=0.98 [95%CI: 0.96-1.00] and LOS RR=0.98 [95% CI: 0.97-0.99]), but not for RA or ER visits. However, increases in within-hospital volume did not lead to changes in mortality (OR=1.00, 95% CI: 0.96-1.10), RA (OR=1.00, 95% CI: 0.99-1.00), or ER visits (OR=0.99, 95% CI: 0.98-1.00). Volume increases within hospitals did lead to small improvements in LOS (RR=0.996, 95% CI: 0.993-0.999). Conclusions: Increasing volumes within hospitals did not lead to improvements in mortality in our study, but did result in small improvements in LOS. The decrease in LOS was likely appropriate as it was not associated with changes in RA or ER visits. A volume-outcome relationship between absolute hospital volume and improved mortality was observed, but was not explained by increasing volumes within hospitals; thus practice did not make perfect for mortality.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document