The interaction between social determinants of health and cervical cancer survival: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review aimed to investigate what are the most relevant social determinants of health (SDH), how they are measured, how they interact among themselves and what is their impact on the outcomes of cervical cancer patients. METHODS: Search was performed in PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, and Google Scholar databases from January 2001 to September 2022. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42022346854). We followed the PICOS strategy: Population- Patients treated for cervical cancer in the United States; Intervention - Any SDH; Comparison- None; Outcome measures- Cancer treatment outcomes related to the survival of the patients; Types of studies- Observational studies. Two reviewers extracted the data following the PRISMA guidelines. Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Checklist for Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies was used for risk of bias (ROB) assessment. RESULTS: Twenty-four studies were included (22 had low and 2 had moderate ROB). Most manuscripts analyzed data from public registries (83.3%) and only one SDH (54.17%). The SDH category of Neighborhood was not included in any study. Although the SDH were measured differently across the studies, not being married, receiving treatment at a low-volume hospital, and having public insurance (Medicaid or Medicare) or not being insured was associated with shorter survival of cervical cancer patients in most studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is a deficit in the number of studies comprehensively assessing the impact of SDH on cervical cancer treatment-related outcomes. Marital status, hospital volume and health insurance status are potential predictors of worse outcome.

Racial and Socioeconomic Differences and Surgical Outcomes in Pancreaticoduodenectomy Patients: A Systematic Review of High- Versus Low-Volume Hospitals in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is associated with better outcomes in high-volume hospitals. However, it is unknown whether and to what extent the improved performance of high-volume hospitals may be associated with racial and socioeconomic factors, which have been shown to impact operative and postoperative outcomes in major surgeries. This review aims to identify the differences in racial and socioeconomic characteristics of patients who underwent PD surgery in high- and low-volume hospitals. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science were systematically searched between May 1, 2023 and May 7, 2023 without any time restriction on publication date. Studies that were conducted in the United States and had a direct comparison between high- and low-volume hospitals were included. RESULTS: A total of 30 observational studies were included. When racial proportions were compared by hospital volume, thirteen studies reported that compared to high-volume hospitals, a higher percentage of racial minorities underwent PD in low-volume hospitals. Disparities in traveling distance, education levels, and median income at baseline between high- and low-volume hospitals were reported by four, three, and two studies, respectively. CONCLUSION: A racial difference at baseline between high- and low-volume hospitals was observed. Socioeconomic factors were less frequently included in existing literature. Future studies are needed to understand the socioeconomic differences between patients receiving PD surgery in high- and low-volume hospitals.

Low-Volume Elective Surgery and Outcomes in Medicare Beneficiaries Treated at Hospital Networks.

Importance: Minimum volume standards have been advocated as a strategy to improve outcomes for certain surgical procedures. Hospital networks could avoid low-volume surgery by consolidating cases within network hospitals that meet volume standards, thus optimizing outcomes while retaining cases and revenue. The rates of compliance with volume standards among hospital networks and the association of volume standards with outcomes at these hospitals remain unknown. Objective: To quantify low-volume surgery and associated outcomes within hospital networks. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used Medicare Provider Analysis and Review data to examine fee-for-service beneficiaries aged 66 to 99 years who underwent 1 of 10 elective surgical procedures (abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, carotid endarterectomy, mitral valve repair, hip or knee replacement, bariatric surgery, or resection for lung, esophageal, pancreatic, or rectal cancers) in a network hospital from 2016 to 2018. Hospital volume for each procedure (calculated with the use of the National Inpatient Sample) was compared with yearly hospital volume standards for that procedure recommended by The Leapfrog Group. Networks were then categorized into 4 groups according to whether or not that hospital or another hospital in the network met low-volume standards for that procedure. Data were analyzed from February to June 2023. Exposure: Receipt of surgery in a low-volume hospital within a network. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcomes were postoperative complications, 30-day readmission, and 30-day mortality, stratified by the volume status of the hospital and network type. The secondary outcome was the availability of a different high-volume hospital within the same network or outside the network and its proximity to the patient (based on hospital referral region and zip code). Results: In all, data were analyzed for 950 079 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries (mean [SD] age, 74.4 [6.5] years; 621 138 females [59.2%] and 427 931 males [40.8%]) who underwent 1 049 069 procedures at 2469 hospitals within 382 networks. Of these networks, 380 (99.5%) had at least 1 low-volume hospital performing the elective procedure of interest. In 35 137 of 44 011 procedures (79.8%) that were performed at low-volume hospitals, there was a hospital that met volume standards within the same network and hospital referral region located a median (IQR) distance of 29 (12-60) miles from the patient's home. Across hospital networks, there was 43-fold variation in rates of low-volume surgery among the procedures studied (from 1.5% of carotid endarterectomies to 65.0% of esophagectomies). In adjusted analyses, postoperative outcomes were inferior at low-volume hospitals compared with hospitals meeting volume standards, with a 30-day mortality of 8.1% at low-volume hospitals vs 5.5% at hospitals that met volume standards (adjusted odds ratio, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.61-0.73]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Findings of this study suggest that most US hospital networks had hospitals performing low-volume surgery that is associated with inferior surgical outcomes despite availability of a different in-network hospital that met volume standards within a median of 29 miles for the vast majority of patients. Strategies are needed to help patients access high-quality care within their networks, including avoidance of elective surgery at low-volume hospitals. Avoidance of low-volume surgery could be considered a process measure that reflects attention to quality within hospital networks.

Comorbidity, Racial, and Socioeconomic Disparities in Total Knee and Hip Arthroplasty at High Versus Low-Volume Centers.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to compare the epidemiologic and demographic profiles and inpatient postoperative complication and economic outcomes of patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty of the hip and knee (TJA) at high-volume centers (HVCs) versus low-volume centers (LVCs) using a large national registry. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used data from the National Inpatient Sample from 2006 to the third quarter of 2015. Discharges representing patients aged 40 years or older receiving a primary total hip arthroplasty or total knee arthroplasty were included. Patients were stratified into those undergoing their procedure at HVCs versus LVCs. Epidemiologic, demographic, and inpatient postoperative complications and economic outcomes were comparatively analyzed between groups. RESULTS: A total of 7,694,331 TJAs were conducted at HVCs while 1,044,358 were conducted at LVCs. Patients at LVCs were more likely to be female, be Hispanic, be non-Hispanic Black, and use Medicare and Medicaid than patients at HVCs. Of the 29 Elixhauser comorbidities examined, 14 were markedly higher at LVCs while 11 were markedly higher at HVCs. Patients who underwent TJA at LVCs were more likely to develop cardiac, respiratory, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, hematoma/seroma, wound dehiscence, and postoperative infection complications and were more likely to die during hospitalization. Patients at HVCs were more likely to develop postoperative anemia. Length of stay and total charges were higher at LVCs compared with HVCs. DISCUSSION: There are notable differences in the demographics, epidemiologic characteristics, and inpatient outcomes of patients undergoing TJA at HVCs versus LVCs. Attention should be directed to identifying and applying the specific resources, processes, and practices that improve outcomes at HVCs while referral practices and centralization efforts should be mindful to not worsen already existing disparities.

Trends in the likelihood of receiving percutaneous coronary intervention in a low-volume hospital and disparities by sociodemographic communities.

INTRODUCTION: Over the past two decades, percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) capacity has increased while coronary artery disease has decreased, potentially lowering per-hospital PCI volumes, which is associated with less favorable patient outcomes. Trends in the likelihood of receiving PCI in a low-volume center have not been well-documented, and it is unknown whether certain socioeconomic factors are associated with a greater risk of PCI in a low-volume facility. Our study aims to determine the likelihood of being treated in a low-volume PCI center over time and if this likelihood differs by sociodemographic factors. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 374,066 hospitalized patients in California receiving PCI from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2018. Our primary outcome was the likelihood of PCI discharges at a low-volume hospital (<150 PCI/year), and secondary outcomes included whether this likelihood varied across different sociodemographic groups and across low-volume hospitals stratified by high or low ZIP code median income. RESULTS: The proportion of PCI discharges from low-volume hospitals increased from 5.4% to 11.0% over the study period. Patients of all sociodemographic groups considered were more likely to visit low-volume hospitals over time (P<0.001). Latinx patients were more likely to receive PCI at a low-volume hospital compared with non-Latinx White in 2010 with a 166% higher gap in 2018 (unadjusted proportions). The gaps in relative risk (RR) between Black, Latinx and Asian patients versus non-Latinx white increased over time, whereas the gap between private versus public/no insurance, and high versus low income decreased (interaction P<0.001). In low-income ZIP codes, patients with Medicaid were less likely to visit low-volume hospitals than patients with private insurance in 2010; however, this gap reversed and increased by 500% in 2018. Patients with low income were more likely to receive PCI at low-volume hospitals relative to patients with high income in all study years. CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood of receiving PCI at low-volume hospitals has increased across all race/ethnicity, insurance, and income groups over time; however, this increase has not occurred evenly across all sociodemographic groups.

Hospital Volume of Emergency General Surgery and its Impact on Inpatient Mortality for Geriatric Patients: Analysis From 3994 Hospitals.

BACKGROUND: Previous investigations have shown a positive association between hospital volume of operations and clinical outcomes. However, it is unclear whether such relationships also apply to emergency surgery. We sought to examine the association between hospital case volume and inpatient mortality for 7 common emergency general surgery (EGS) operations among geriatric patients. METHODS: This is a population based retrospective cohort study using the Centers of Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) Limited Dataset Files (LDS) from 2011 to 2013. The 7 most common emergency surgeries included (1) partial colectomy, (2) small-bowel resection (SBR), (3) cholecystectomy, (4) appendectomy, (5) lysis of adhesions (LOA), (6) operative management of peptic ulcer disease (PUD), and (7) laparotomy with the primary outcome being inpatient mortality. Risk-adjusted inpatient mortality was plotted against operative volume. Subsequently an operative volume threshold was calculated using a best fit regression method. Based on these estimates, high- and low-volume hospitals were compared to examine significance of outcomes. Significance was defined as P-value < .05. RESULTS: The final cohort comprised of 414 779 patients from 3994 hospitals. The standardized mortality ratio (SMR) for high-volume centers were lower in 6 out of 8 surgeries examined. Small-bowel resection and partial colectomy operations had a significant decrease in mortality based on a volume threshold. CONCLUSION: We observed decreased mortality with higher surgical volume for small-bowel resection and partial colectomy operations. Such differences may be related to practice patterns during the perioperative period, as complications related to the perioperative care were significantly lower for high-volume centers.

Does hospital volume affect outcomes after abdominal cancer surgery: an analysis of Swiss health insurance claims data.

BACKGROUND: Medical treatment quality has been shown to be better in high volume than in low volume hospitals. However, this relationship has not yet been confirmed in abdominal cancer in Switzerland and is relevant for referral of patients and healthcare planning. Thus, the present study investigates the association between hospital volumes for surgical resections of colon, gastric, rectal, and pancreatic carcinomas and outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective analysis is based on anonymized claims data of patients with mandatory health insurance at Helsana Group, a leading health insurance in Switzerland. Outcome parameters were length of hospital stay, mortality and cost during the inpatient stay as well as at 1-year follow-up. Hospital volume information was derived from the Quality Indicators dataset provided by the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health. The impact of hospital volume on the different treatment outcomes was statistically tested using generalized estimating equations (GEE) models, taking into account the non-independence of observations from the same hospital. RESULTS: The studies included 2'859 resections in patients aged 18 years and older who were hospitalized for abdominal cancer surgery between 2014 and 2018. Colon resections were the most common procedures (n = 1'690), followed by rectal resections (n = 709). For rectal, colon and pancreatic resections, an increase in the mean number of interventions per hospital and a reduction of low volume hospitals could be observed. For the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes, we did not observe a clear dose-response relationship, as no significantly better outcomes were observed in the higher-volume category than in the lower-volume category. Even though a positive "routine effect" cannot be excluded, our results suggest that even hospitals with low volumes are able to achieve comparable treatment outcomes to larger hospitals. CONCLUSION: In summary, this study increases transparency on the relationship between hospital volume and treatment success. It shows that simple measures such as defining a minimum number of procedures only might not lead to the intended effects if other factors such as infrastructure, the operating team or aggregation level of the available data are not taken into account.

Widening volume and persistent outcome disparity in valve operations: New York statewide analysis, 2005-2016.

OBJECTIVES: Volume concentration of complex noncardiac operations to high-volume centers has been observed, but whether this is also occurring in cardiac surgery is unknown. We examined the relationship between volume concentration and mortality rates for valve surgery and coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) between 2005 and 2016 in New York State. METHODS: We analyzed publicly available, hospital-level case volume and risk-adjusted mortality rates (RAMRs) from 2005 to 2016 for isolated CABG and isolated or concomitant valve operations performed in New York. We identified hospitals in the top- and bottom-volume quartiles for each procedure type and compared changes in percent market share and outcomes. Bivariate and univariate longitudinal analysis was used to evaluate the statistical significance of the temporal trend. RESULTS: Among 36 centers, percent market share of the top-volume quartile increased for valve cases from 54.4% to 59.4%, whereas CABG share increased from 41.4% to 44.3%. No significant changes were noted in market share for the bottom quartile. The top-volume quartile demonstrated significant trends in improving outcomes over the study period for both valve procedures (RAMR: -0.261%/year, P < .001) and CABG (RAMR: -0.071%/year, P = .018). No significant trends were noted in the bottom quartile for either procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In New York, over the last decade, highest-volume hospitals increased their market share for valve operations while maintaining lower mortality rates than lowest-volume hospitals. Valve volume is regionalizing in the setting of a persistent outcome gap between the highest- and lowest-volume hospitals, suggesting that volume-based referrals for specialized cardiac procedures may improve surgical mortality.

Influence of broader geographic allograft sharing on outcomes and cost in smaller lung transplant centers.

OBJECTIVE: On November 24, 2017, Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network implemented a change to lung allocation replacing donor service area with a 250 nautical mile radius around donor hospitals. We sought to evaluate the experience of a small to medium size center following implementation. METHODS: Patients (47 pre and 54 post) undergoing lung transplantation were identified from institutional database from January 2016 to October 2019. Detailed chart review and analysis of institutional cost data was performed. Univariate analysis was performed to compare eras. RESULTS: Similar short-term mortality and primary graft dysfunction were observed between groups. Decreased local donation (68% vs 6%; P < .001), increased travel distance (145 vs 235 miles; P = .004), travel cost ($8626 vs $14,482; P < .001), and total procurement cost ($60,852 vs $69,052; P = .001) were observed postimplementation. We also document an increase in waitlist mortality postimplementation (6.9 vs 31.6 per 100 patient-years; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Following implementation of the new allocation policy in a small to medium size center, several changes were in accordance with policy intention. However, concerning shifts emerged, including increased waitlist mortality and resource utilization. Continued close monitoring of transplant centers stratified by size and location are paramount to maintaining global availability of lung transplantation to all Americans regardless of geographic residence or socioeconomic status.

Impact of nationwide centralization of oesophageal, gastric, and pancreatic surgery on travel distance and experienced burden in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: This study aims to assess the impact of nationwide centralization of surgery on travel distance and travel burden among patients with oesophageal, gastric, and pancreatic cancer according to age in the Netherlands. As centralization of care increases to improve postoperative outcomes, travel distance and experienced burden might increase. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who underwent surgery between 2006 and 2017 for oesophageal, gastric and pancreatic cancer in the Netherlands were included. Travel distance between patient's home address and hospital of surgery in kilometres was calculated. Questionnaires were used to assess experienced travel burden in a subpopulation (n = 239). Multivariable ordinal logistic regression models were constructed to identify predictors for longer travel distance. RESULTS: Over 23,838 patients were included, in whom median travel distance for surgical care increased for oesophageal cancer (n = 9217) from 18 to 28 km, for gastric cancer (n = 6743) from 9 to 26 km, and for pancreatic cancer (n = 7878) from 18 to 25 km (all p < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses showed an increase in travel distance for all cancer types over time. In general, patients experienced a physical and social burden, and higher financial costs, due to traveling extra kilometres. Patients aged >70 years travelled less often independently (56% versus 68%), as compared to patients aged ≤70 years. CONCLUSION: With nationwide centralization, travel distance increased for patients undergoing oesophageal, gastric, and pancreatic cancer surgery. Younger patients travelled longer distances and experienced a lower travel burden, as compared to elderly patients. Nevertheless, on a global scale, travel distances in the Netherlands remain limited.

Impact of Volume on Mortality and Hospital Stay After Lung Cancer Surgery in a Single-Payer System.

BACKGROUND: There is a literature gap for hospitals in single-payer health care systems quantifying the influence of hospital volume on outcomes after major lung cancer resection. We aimed to determine the effect of hospital volume on mortality and length of stay. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using administrative, population-based data from a single-payer universal health care system was performed in adults with non-small cell lung cancer who underwent lobectomy or pneumonectomy between 2008 and 2017. Hospital volume was defined as the average annual number of major lung resections performed at each institution. Length of stay and postoperative mortality were compared using multivariable linear and nonlinear regression between hospital volume categories and continuously. Adjusted association between hospital volume and postoperative mortality was determined by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: In all, 10 831 lung resections were performed: 1237 pneumonectomies and 9594 lobectomies. Patients undergoing lobectomy at high-volume hospitals had shorter median length of stay (6 vs 8 days, P = .001) compared with low-volume hospitals. After adjusting for confounders, surgery at a high-volume center was significantly associated with shorter length of stay after lobectomy and overall resections (P ≤ .001), but not after pneumonectomy (P = .787). Surgery at a high-volume center was positively associated with improved 90-day mortality in lobectomy and overall procedures (odds ratio 0.607 [95% confidence interval, 0.399 to 0.925], and 0.632 [95% confidence interval, 0.441 to 0.904], respectively). Volume was not a predictor of 90-day mortality after pneumonectomy (odds ratio 0.533 [95% confidence interval, 0.257 to 1.104], P = .090). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery at a high-volume center was positively correlated with improved 90-day survival and shorter hospital length of stay. The results support regionalized lung cancer care in a single-payer health care system.

The Impact of Plastic Surgery Volume on Inpatient Burn Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Acute burn care involves multiple types of physicians. Plastic surgery offers the full spectrum of acute burn care and reconstructive surgery. The authors hypothesize that access to plastic surgery will be associated with improved inpatient outcomes in the treatment of acute burns. METHODS: Acute burn encounters with known percentage total body surface area were extracted from the National Inpatient Sample from 2012 to 2014 based on International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Edition, codes. Plastic surgery volume per facility was determined based on procedure codes for flaps, breast reconstruction, and complex hand reconstruction. Outcomes included odds of receiving a flap, patient safety indicators, and mortality. Regression models included the following variables: age, percentage total body surface area, gender, inhalation injury, comorbidities, hospital size, and urban/teaching status of hospital. RESULTS: The weighted sample included 99,510 burn admissions with a mean percentage total body surface area of 15.5 percent. The weighted median plastic surgery volume by facility was 245 cases per year. Compared with the lowest quartile, the upper three quartiles of plastic surgery volume were associated with increased likelihood of undergoing flap procedures (p < 0.03). The top quartile of plastic surgery volume was also associated with decreased odds of patient safety indicator events (p < 0.001). Plastic surgery facility volume was not significantly associated with a difference in the likelihood of inpatient death. CONCLUSIONS: Burn encounters treated at high-volume plastic surgery facilities were more likely to undergo flap operations. High-volume plastic surgery centers were also associated with a lower likelihood of inpatient complications. Therefore, where feasible, acute burn patients should be triaged to high-volume centers. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Assessment of Racial Disparities in the Risks of Septic and Aseptic Revision Total Knee Replacements.

Importance: Black patients are at higher risk of revision total knee replacement (TKR) than White patients, but whether racial disparities exist for both septic and aseptic revision TKR and the reason for any disparities are unknown. Objective: To assess the risk of septic and aseptic revision TKR in Black and White patients and to examine interactions among race and socioeconomic and hospital-related variables that are associated with revision TKR risk. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included residents of New York, California, and Florida who underwent TKR. Patient-level data were obtained from the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System, California's Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development Patient Discharge Database, and Florida's Healthcare Utilization Project State Inpatient Database from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2014. Community characteristics were calculated from the US Census and linked to discharges by patient zip code. American Hospital Association Annual Survey data were linked to discharges using hospital identifiers. The analyses were performed from March 1 to October 30, 2020, with subsequent analyses in April 2021. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cox proportional hazards regression modeling was used to measure the association of race with septic and aseptic revision TKR. Results: A total of 722 492 patients underwent primary TKR, of whom 445 616 (61.68%) were female and 61 092 (8.46%) were Black. Black patients were at higher risk of septic (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11; 95% CI, 1.03-1.20) and aseptic (HR, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.33-1.46) revision TKR compared with White patients. Other risk factors for septic revision TKR were diabetes (HR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.17-1.30), obesity (HR, 1.13; 95% CI, 1.17-1.30), kidney disease (HR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.29-1.57), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (HR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.15-1.30), inflammatory arthritis (HR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.39-1.69), surgical site complications during the index TKR (HR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.87-2.56), Medicaid insurance (HR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.04-1.31), and low annual TKR volume at the hospital where the index TKR was performed (HR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.41-1.68). Risk factors for aseptic revision TKR were male sex (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.00-1.06), workers' compensation insurance (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.51-1.72), and low hospital TKR volume (HR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.07-1.22). Patients with obesity had a lower risk of aseptic TKR revision (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77-0.84). In an analysis within each category of hospital TKR volume, the HR for aseptic revision among Black vs White patients was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.04-1.37) at very-low-volume hospitals (≤89 TKRs annually) compared with 1.68 (95% CI, 1.48-1.90) at very-high-volume hospitals (≥645 TKRs annually). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, Black patients were at significantly higher risk of aseptic revision TKR and, to a lesser extent, septic revision TKR compared with White patients. Racial disparities in aseptic revision risk were greatest at hospitals with very high TKR volumes.

Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection in Europe: Results of 1000 Neoplastic Lesions From the German Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection Registry.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) enables the curative resection of early malignant lesions and is associated with reduced recurrence risk. Due to the lack of comprehensive ESD data in the West, the German ESD registry was set up to evaluate relevant outcomes of ESD. METHODS: The German ESD registry is a prospective uncontrolled multicenter study. During a 35-month period, 20 centers included 1000 ESDs of neoplastic lesions. The results were evaluated in terms of en bloc, R0, curative resection rates, and recurrence rate after a 3-month and 12-month follow-up. Additionally, participating centers were grouped into low-volume (≤20 ESDs/y), middle-volume (20-50/y), and high-volume centers (>50/y). A multivariate analysis investigating risk factors for noncurative resection was performed. RESULTS: Overall, en bloc, R0, and curative resection rates of 92.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.90-0.94), 78.8% (95% CI, 0.76-0.81), and 72.3% (95% CI, 0.69-0.75) were achieved, respectively. The overall complication rate was 8.3% (95% CI, 0.067-0.102), whereas the recurrence rate after 12 months was 2.1%. High-volume centers had significantly higher en bloc, R0, curative resection rates, and recurrence rates and lower complication rates than middle- or low-volume centers. The lesion size, hybrid ESD, age, stage T1b carcinoma, and treatment outside high-volume centers were identified as risk factors for noncurative ESD. CONCLUSION: In Germany, ESD achieves excellent en bloc resection rates but only modest curative resection rates. ESD requires a high level of expertise, and results vary significantly depending on the center's yearly case volume.

Prevalence of rapid response systems in small hospitals: A questionnaire survey.

ABSTRACT: The rapid response system (RRS) was introduced for early stage intervention in patients with deteriorating clinical conditions. Responses to unexpected in-hospital patient emergencies varied among hospitals. This study was conducted to understand the prevalence of RRS in smaller hospitals and to identify the need for improvements in the responses to in-hospital emergencies.A questionnaire survey of 971 acute-care hospitals in western Japan was conducted from May to June 2019 on types of in-hospital emergency response for patients in cardiac arrest (e.g., medical emergency teams [METs]), before obvious deterioration (e.g., rapid response teams [RRTs]), and areas for improvement.We received 149 responses, including those from 56 smaller hospitals (≤200 beds), which provided fewer responses than other hospitals. Response systems for cardiac arrest were used for at least a limited number of hours in 129 hospitals (87%). The absence of RRS was significantly more frequent in smaller hospitals than in larger hospitals (13/56, 23% vs 1/60, 2%; P < .01). METs and RRTs operated in 17 (11%) and 15 (10%) hospitals, respectively, and the operation rate for RRTs was significantly lower in smaller hospitals than in larger hospitals (1/56, 2% vs 12/60, 20%; P < .01). Respondents identified the need for education and more medical staff and supervisors; data collection or involvement of the medical safety management sector was ranked low.The prevalence of RRS or predetermined responses before obvious patient deterioration was ≤10% in small hospitals. Specific education and appointment of supervisors could support RRS in small hospitals.

Impact of hospital volume on resource use after elective cardiac surgery: A contemporary analysis.

BACKGROUND: Institutional experience has been associated with reduced mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting and valve operations. Using a contemporary, national cohort, we examined the impact of hospital volume on hospitalization costs and postdischarge resource utilization after these operations. METHODS: Adults undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting or valve operations were identified in the 2016 to 2017 Nationwide Readmissions Database. Institutions were grouped into volume quartiles based on annual elective cardiac surgery caseload, and comparisons were made between the lowest and highest quartiles, using generalized linear models. RESULTS: Of an estimated 296,510 patients, 24.8% were treated at low-volume hospitals and 25.2% at high-volume hospitals. Compared with patients treated at low-volume hospitals, patients managed at high-volume hospitals were younger, had more comorbidities, and more frequently underwent combined coronary artery bypass grafting valve (13.0% vs 12.3%, P < .001) and multivalve operations (6.2% vs 3.1%, P < .001). After adjustment, operations at high-volume hospitals were associated with a $7,600 reduction (95% confidence interval $4,700-$10,500) in costs. High-volume hospitals were also associated with reduced odds of mortality, non-home discharge, and 30-day non-elective readmission compared to low-volume hospitals. CONCLUSION: Despite increased complexity at high-volume centers, greater operative volume was independently associated with reduced hospitalization costs and mortality after elective cardiac operations. Reduction in non-home discharge and readmissions suggests this effect to extend beyond acute hospitalization, which may guide value-based care paradigms.

Hospital volume is associated with cost and outcomes variation in 2,942 pelvic reconstructions.

BACKGROUND: Complex pelvic reconstruction is challenging for plastic and reconstructive surgeons following surgical resection of the lower gastrointestinal or genitourinary tract. Complication rates and hospital costs are variable and may be linked to the hospital case volume of pelvic reconstructions performed. A comprehensive examination of these factors has yet to be performed. METHODS: Data were retrieved for patients undergoing pedicled flap reconstruction after pelvic resections in the American National Inpatient Sample database between 2010 and 2014. Patients were then separated into three groups based on hospital case volume for pelvic reconstruction. Multivariate logistic regression and gamma regression with log-link function were used to analyze associations between hospital case volume, surgical outcomes, and cost. RESULTS: In total, 2,942 patients underwent pelvic flap reconstruction with surgical complications occurring in 1,466 patients (49.8%). Total median cost was $38,469.40. Pelvic reconstructions performed at high-volume hospitals were significantly associated with fewer surgical complications (low: 51.4%, medium: 52.8%, high: 34.8%; p < 0.001) and increased costs (low: $35,645.14, medium: $38,714.92, high: $44,967.29; p < 0.001). After regression adjustment, high hospital volume was the strongest independently associated factor for decreased surgical complications (Exp[ß], 0.454; 95% Confidence Interval, 0.346-0.596; p < 0.001) and increased hospital cost (Exp[ß], 1.351; 95% Confidence Interval, 1.285-1.421; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing pelvic flap reconstruction after oncologic resections experience high complication rates. High case volume hospitals were independently associated with significantly fewer surgical complications but increased hospital costs. Reconstructive surgeons may approach these challenging patients with greater awareness of these associations to improve outcomes and address cost drivers.

Complications After Complex Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery: Benefits and Costs Associated with Inter-hospital Transfer Among Medicare Beneficiaries.

BACKGROUND: Inter-hospital transfer (IHT) may help reduce failure-to-rescue (FTR) by transferring patients to centers with a higher level of expertise than the index hospital. We sought to identify factors associated with an IHT and examine if IHT was associated with improved outcomes after complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery. METHODS: Medicare Inpatient Standard Analytic Files were utilized to identify patients with >1 postoperative complication following resection for esophageal, pancreatic, liver, or colorectal cancer between 2013 and 2017. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association of different factors with the chance of IHT, as well as the impact of IHT on failure-to-rescue (FTR) and expenditures. RESULTS: Among 39,973 patients with >1 postoperative complications, 3090 (7.7%) patients were transferred to a secondary hospital. The median LOS at the index hospital prior to IHT was 10 days (IQR, 6-17 days). Patients who underwent IHT more often had experienced multiple complications at the index hospital compared with non-IHT patients (57.7% vs. 38.9%) (p<0.001). Transferred patients more commonly had undergone surgery at a low-volume index hospital (n=218, 60.2%) compared with non-IHT (n=10,351, 25.9%) patients (p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, hospital volume remained strongly associated with transfer to an acute care hospital (ACH) (OR 5.53; 95% CI 3.91-7.84; p<0.001), as did multiple complications (OR 2.01, 95% CI 1.56-2.57). The incidence of FTR was much higher among IHT-ACH patients (20.2%) versus non-IHT patients (11.5%) (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.11-2.05) (p<0.001). Medicare expenditures were higher among patients who had IHT-ACH ($72.1k USD; IQR, $48.1k-$116.7k) versus non-IHT ($38.5k USD; IQR, $28.1k-$59.2k USD) (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Approximately 1 in 13 patients had an IHT after complex gastrointestinal cancer surgery. IHT was associated with high rates of FTR, which was more pronounced among patients who underwent surgery at an index low-volume hospital. IHT was associated with higher overall CMS expenditures.

Is Improved Survival in Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer Worth the Extra Cost at High-Volume Centers?

BACKGROUND: Volume of operative cases may be an important factor associated with improved survival for early-stage pancreatic cancer. Most high-volume pancreatic centers are also academic institutions, which have been associated with additional healthcare costs. We hypothesized that at high-volume centers, the value of the extra survival outweighs the extra cost. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study used data from the California Cancer Registry linked to the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development database from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2012. Stage I-II pancreatic cancer patients who underwent resection were included. Multivariable analyses estimated overall survival and 30-day costs at low- vs high-volume pancreatic surgery centers. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and incremental net benefit (INB) were estimated, and statistical uncertainty was characterized using net benefit regression. RESULTS: Of 2,786 patients, 46.5% were treated at high-volume centers and 53.5% at low-volume centers. There was a 0.45-year (5.4 months) survival benefit (95% CI 0.21-0.69) and a $7,884 extra cost associated with receiving surgery at high-volume centers (95% CI $4,074-$11,694). The ICER was $17,529 for an additional year of survival (95% CI $7,997-$40,616). For decision-makers willing to pay more than $20,000 for an additional year of life, high-volume centers appear cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: Although healthcare costs were greater at high-volume centers, patients undergoing pancreatic surgery at high-volume centers experienced a survival benefit (5.4 months). The extra cost of $17,529 per additional year is quite modest for improved survival and is economically attractive by many oncology standards.

Contemporary Practices and Complications of Surgery for Thoracic Outlet Syndrome in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic outlet syndrome (TOS) surgery is relatively rare and controversial, given the challenges in diagnosis as well as wide variation in symptomatic and functional recovery. Our aims were to measure trends in utilization of TOS surgery, complications, and mortality rates in a nationally representative cohort and compare higher versus lower volume centers. METHODS: The National Inpatient Sample was queried using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, codes for rib resection and scalenectomy paired with axillo-subclavian aneurysm (arterial [aTOS]), subclavian deep vein thrombosis (venous [vTOS]), or brachial plexus lesions (neurogenic [nTOS]). Basic descriptive statistics, nonparametric tests for trend, and multivariable hierarchical regression models with random intercept for center were used to compare outcomes for TOS types, trends over time, and higher and lower volume hospitals, respectively. RESULTS: There were 3,547 TOS operations (for an estimated 18,210 TOS operations nationally) performed between 2010 and 2015 (89.2% nTOS, 9.9% vTOS, and 0.9% aTOS) with annual case volume increasing significantly over time (P = 0.03). Higher volume centers (≥10 cases per year) represented 5.2% of hospitals and 37.0% of cases, and these centers achieved significantly lower overall major complication (defined as neurologic injury, arterial or venous injury, vascular graft complication, pneumothorax, hemorrhage/hematoma, or lymphatic leak) rates (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.71 [95% confidence interval 0.52-0.98]; P = 0.04], but no difference in neurologic complications such as brachial plexus injury (aOR 0.69 [0.20-2.43]; P = 0.56) or vascular injuries/graft complications (aOR 0.71 [0.0.33-1.54]; P = 0.39). Overall mortality was 0.6%, neurologic injury was rare (0.3%), and the proportion of patients experiencing complications decreased over time (P = 0.03). However, vTOS and aTOS had >2.5 times the odds of major complication compared with nTOS (OR 2.68 [1.88-3.82] and aOR 4.26 [1.78-10.17]; P < 0.001), and ∼10 times the odds of a vascular complication (aOR 10.37 [5.33-20.19] and aOR 12.93 [3.54-47.37]; P < 0.001], respectively. As the number of complications decreased, average hospital charges also significantly decreased over time (P < 0.001). Total hospital charges were on average higher when surgery was performed in lower volume centers (<10 cases per year) compared with higher volume centers (mean $65,634 [standard deviation 98,796] vs. $45,850 [59,285]; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The annual number of TOS operations has increased in the United States from 2010 to 2015, whereas complications and average hospital charges have decreased. Mortality and neurologic injury remain rare. Higher volume centers delivered higher value care: less or similar operative morbidity with lower total hospital charges.