RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic anti-reflux surgery (LARS) remains central to the management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease but the scale and variation in provision in England is unknown. The aims of this study were firstly to examine the processes and outcomes of anti-reflux surgery in England and compare them to national guidelines and secondly to explore potential variations in practice nationally and establish peer benchmarks. METHODS: All adult patients who underwent LARSin England during the Financial years FY 2011/2012-FY 2016/2017 were identified in the Surgeon's Workload Outcomes and Research Database (SWORD), which is based on the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) data warehouse. Outcomes included activity volume, day-case rate, short-stay rate, 2- and 30-day readmission rates and 30-day re-operation rates. Funnel plots were used to identify national variation in practice. RESULTS: In total, 12,086 patients underwent LARS in England during the study period. The operation rate decreased slightly over the study period from 5.2 to 4.6 per 100,000 people. Most outcomes were in line with national guidelines including the conversion rate (0.76%), 30-day re-operation rate (1.43%) and 2- and 30-day readmission rates (1.65 and 8.54%, respectively). The day-case rate was low but increased from 7.4 to 15.1% during the 5-year period. Significant variation was found, particularly in terms of hospital volume, and day-case, short-stay and conversion rates. CONCLUSION: Although overall outcomes are comparable to studies from other countries, there is significant variation in anti-reflux surgery activity and outcomes in England. We recommend that units use these data to drive local quality improvement efforts.
Asunto(s)
Reflujo Gastroesofágico/cirugía , Laparoscopía/estadística & datos numéricos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Ambulatorios/estadística & datos numéricos , Conversión a Cirugía Abierta/estadística & datos numéricos , Inglaterra/epidemiología , Humanos , Tiempo de Internación/estadística & datos numéricos , Readmisión del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Reoperación/estadística & datos numéricosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: This report describes the case mix and outcomes of patients with oesophageal cancer admitted to adult critical care units following elective oesophageal surgery in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. METHODS: Admissions to critical care following elective oesophageal surgery for malignancy were identified using data from the Intensive Care National Audit and Research Centre (ICNARC) Case Mix Programme Database. Information on admissions between December 1995 and September 2007 were extracted and the association between in-hospital mortality and patient characteristics on admission to critical care was assessed using multiple logistic regression analysis. The performance of three prognostic models (Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II and the ICNARC physiology score) was also evaluated. RESULTS: Between 1995 and 2007, there were 7227 admissions to 181 critical care units following oesophageal surgery for malignancy. Overall mortality in critical care was 4.4% and in-hospital mortality was 11%, although both declined steadily over time. Eight hundred and seventy-three (12.2%) patients were readmitted to critical care, most commonly for respiratory complications (49%) and surgical complications (25%). Readmitted patients had a critical care unit mortality of 24.7% and in-hospital mortality of 33.9%. Overall in-hospital mortality was associated with patient age, and various physiological measurements on admission to critical care (partial pressure of arterial oxygen (PaO2):fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) ratio, lowest arterial pH, mechanical ventilation, serum albumin, urea and creatinine). The three prognostic models evaluated performed poorly in measures of discrimination, calibration and goodness of fit. CONCLUSIONS: Surgery for oesophageal malignancy continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Age and organ dysfunction in the early postoperative period are associated with an increased risk of death. Postoperative serum albumin is confirmed as an additional prognostic factor. More work is required to determine how this knowledge may improve clinical management.
Asunto(s)
Cuidados Críticos/tendencias , Bases de Datos Factuales/tendencias , Neoplasias Esofágicas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Esofagectomía/mortalidad , Anciano , Cuidados Críticos/métodos , Esofagectomía/efectos adversos , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Oesophago-gastric cancer services in England have been extensively reorganised since 2001 to deliver a centralised, specialist-led service. Our aim was to assess how well the National Health Service (NHS) in England met organisational standards for oesophago-gastric cancer care. METHODS: Questionnaires that asked about the provision of staging investigations, curative and palliative treatments and key personnel were sent in September 2007 to the lead clinician for oesophago-gastric cancer at all 30 cancer networks and 156 NHS acute trusts in England. RESULTS: Responses were received from all networks and 81% of NHS trusts. All networks provided essential staging investigations and a range of endoscopic palliative therapies. Only 16 of the 30 cancer networks discussed all patients at the specialist multi-disciplinary team meeting and 11 networks had not fully centralised curative surgery. There was also variation between NHS trusts in the integration of the palliative care team, the availability of nurse specialists and the use of dietitians to provide nutritional support. CONCLUSION: There has been considerable progress in reforming oesophago-gastric cancer services but the process of reorganisation is still incomplete and regional differences in service provision exist that may lead to variation in patient outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Esofágicas/terapia , Oncología Médica/organización & administración , Medicina Estatal/organización & administración , Neoplasias Gástricas/terapia , Instituciones Oncológicas/organización & administración , Inglaterra , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Encuestas de Atención de la Salud , Humanos , Innovación Organizacional , Cuidados Paliativos/estadística & datos numéricos , Grupo de Atención al Paciente , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias Gástricas/cirugía , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Recursos HumanosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationship between the route to diagnosis, patient characteristics, treatment intent and 1 -year survival among patients with oesophagogastric (O-G) cancer. SETTING: Cohort study in 142 English NHS trusts and 30 cancer networks. PARTICIPANTS: Patients diagnosed with O-G cancer between October 2007 and June 2009. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. Route to diagnosis defined as general practitioner (GP) referral-urgent (suspected cancer) or non-urgent, hospital consultant referral, or after an emergency admission. Logistic regression was used to estimate associations and adjust for differences in casemix. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of patients diagnosed by route of diagnosis; proportion of patients selected for curative treatment; 1-year survival. RESULTS: Among 14 102 cancer patients, 66.3% were diagnosed after a GP referral, 16.4% after an emergency admission and 17.4% after a hospital consultant referral. Of the 9351 GP referrals, 68.8% were urgent. Compared to urgent GP referrals, a markedly lower proportion of patients diagnosed after emergency admission had a curative treatment plan (36% vs 16%; adjusted OR=0.62, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.74) and a lower proportion survived 1 year (43% vs 27%; OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.68 to 0.89). Urgency of GP referral did not affect treatment intent or survival. Routes to diagnosis varied across cancer networks, with the adjusted proportion of patients diagnosed after emergency admission ranging from 8.7 to 32.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes for cancer patients are worse if diagnosed after emergency admission. Primary care and hospital services should work together to reduce rates of diagnosis after emergency admission and the variation across cancer networks.