Comparison of Hospital Volume and Risk-Standardized Mortality Rate as a Proxy for Hospital Quality in Complex Oncologic Hepatopancreatobiliary Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Centralization of hepatopancreatobiliary procedures to more experienced centers has been recommended but remains controversial. Hospital volume and risk-stratified mortality rates (RSMR) are metrics for interhospital comparison. We compared facility operative volume with facility RSMR as a proxy for hospital quality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent surgery for liver (LC), biliary tract (BTC), and pancreatic (PDAC) cancer were identified in the National Cancer Database (2004-2018). Hierarchical logistic regression was used to create facility-specific models for RSMR. Volume (high versus low) was determined by quintile. Performance (high versus low) was determined by RSMR tercile. Primary outcomes included median facility RSMR and RSMR distributions. Volume- and RSMR-based redistribution was simulated and compared for reductions in 90-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 106,217 patients treated at 1282 facilities were included; 17,695 had LC, 23,075 had BTC, and 65,447 had PDAC. High-volume centers (HVC) had lower RSMR compared with medium-volume centers and low-volume centers for LC, BTC, and PDAC (all p < 0.001). High-performance centers (HPC) had lower RSMR compared with medium-performance centers and low-performance centers for LC, BTC, and PDAC (all p < 0.001). Volume-based redistribution required 16.0 patients for LC, 11.2 for BTC, and 14.9 for PDAC reassigned to 15, 22, and 20 centers, respectively, per life saved within each US census region. RSMR-based redistribution required 4.7 patients for LC, 4.2 for BTC, and 4.9 for PDAC reassigned to 316, 403, and 418 centers, respectively, per life saved within each US census region. CONCLUSIONS: HVC and HPC have the lowest overall and risk-standardized 90-day mortality after oncologic hepatopancreatobiliary procedures, but RSMR may outperform volume as a measure of hospital quality.

Editor's Choice - Optimal Threshold for the Volume-Outcome Relationship After Open AAA Repair in the Endovascular Era: Analysis of the International Consortium of Vascular Registries.

OBJECTIVE: As open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair (OAR) rates decline in the endovascular era, the endorsement of minimum volume thresholds for OAR is increasingly controversial, as this may affect credentialing and training. The purpose of this analysis was to identify an optimal centre volume threshold that is associated with the most significant mortality reduction after OAR, and to determine how this reflects contemporary practice. METHODS: This was an observational study of OARs performed in 11 countries (2010 - 2016) within the International Consortium of Vascular Registry database (n = 178 302). The primary endpoint was post-operative in hospital mortality. Two different methodologies (area under the receiving operating curve optimisation and Markov chain Monte Carlo procedure) were used to determine the optimal centre volume threshold associated with the most significant mortality improvement. RESULTS: In total, 154 912 (86.9%) intact and 23 390 (13.1%) ruptured AAAs were analysed. The majority (63.1%; n = 112 557) underwent endovascular repair (EVAR) (OAR 36.9%; n = 65 745). A significant inverse relationship between increasing centre volume and lower peri-operative mortality after intact and ruptured OAR was evident (p < .001) but not with EVAR. An annual centre volume of between 13 and 16 procedures per year was associated with the most significant mortality reduction after intact OAR (adjusted predicted mortality < 13 procedures/year 4.6% [95% confidence interval 4.0% - 5.2%] vs. ≥ 13 procedures/year 3.1% [95% CI 2.8% - 3.5%]). With the increasing adoption of EVAR, the mean number of OARs per centre (intact + ruptured) decreased significantly (2010 - 2013 = 35.7; 2014 - 2016 = 29.8; p < .001). Only 23% of centres (n = 240/1 065) met the ≥ 13 procedures/year volume threshold, with significant variation between nations (Germany 11%; Denmark 100%). CONCLUSION: An annual centre volume of 13 - 16 OARs per year is the optimal threshold associated with the greatest mortality risk reduction after treatment of intact AAA. However, in the current endovascular era, achieving this threshold requires significant re-organisation of OAR practice delivery in many countries, and would affect provision of non-elective aortic services. Low volume centres continuing to offer OAR should aim to achieve mortality results equivalent to the high volume institution benchmark, using validated data from quality registries to track outcomes.

Industry-Wide Survey of Academic Anesthesiology Departments Provides Up-to-Date Benchmarking Data on Surgical Anesthesia Productivity.

BACKGROUND: Benchmarking group surgical anesthesia productivity continues to be an important but challenging goal for anesthesiology groups. Benchmarking is important because it provides objective data to evaluate staffing needs and costs, identify potential operating room management decisions that could reduce costs or improve efficiency, and support ongoing negotiations and discussions with health system leadership. Unfortunately, good and meaningful benchmarking data are not readily available. Therefore, a survey of academic anesthesiology departments was done to provide current benchmarking data. METHODS: A survey of members of the Society of Academic Associations of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine (SAAAPM) was performed. The survey collected data by facility and included type of facility, number and type of staff and anesthetizing sites each weekday, and the billed American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) units and number of cases over 12 months. The facility types included academic medical center (AMC), community hospital (Community), children's hospital (Children), and ambulatory surgical center (ASC). All anesthesia care billed using ASA units were included, except for obstetric anesthesia. Any care not billed or billed using relative value units (RVUs) were excluded. Percentage of nonoperating room anesthetizing sites, staffing ratio, and surgical anesthesia productivity measurements "per case" and "per site" were calculated. RESULTS: Of the 135 society members, 63 submitted complete surveys for 140 facilities (69 AMC, 26 Community, 7 Children, and 38 ASC). In the survey, overall median productivity for AMC and Children was similar (12,592 and 12,364 total ASA units per anesthetizing site), while the ASC had the lowest median overall productivity (8911 total ASA units per anesthetizing site). By size of facility, in the survey, the smaller facilities (<10 sites, ASC or non-ASC) had lower median overall productivity as compared to larger facilities. For AMC and Children, >20% of anesthetizing sites were nonoperating room anesthetizing sites. Anesthesiology residents worked primarily in AMC and Children. In ASC and Community, residents worked only in 18% and 35% of facilities, respectively. More than half the AMCs reported at least 1 break certified nurse anesthetist (CRNA) each day. CONCLUSIONS: To make data-driven decisions on clinical productivity, anesthesiology leaders need to be able to make meaningful comparisons at the facility level. For a group that provides care in multiple facilities, one can make internal comparisons among facilities and follow measurements over time. It is valuable for leaders to also be compare their facilities with industry-wide measurements, in other words, benchmark their facilities. These results provide benchmarking data for academic anesthesiology departments.

Volume Standards for Open Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair Are Not Associated With Improved Clinical Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Volume-outcome relationships exist for many complex surgical procedures, prompting institutions to adopt surgical volume standards for credentialing. The current Leapfrog Group Hospital volume standard for open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair (OAR) is 15 per year. However, this is primarily based on data from the 1990s and may not be appropriate given the dramatic decline in OAR. We sought to quantify the proportion of hospitals meeting volume standards, the difference in perioperative outcomes between low-volume and high-volume hospitals, and the potential travel burden of volume credentialing on patients. METHODS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries for individuals aged ≥65 years undergoing OAR in 2013-2014. Hospital "all-payer" annual volume was estimated based on the national proportion of patients undergoing OAR covered by Medicare in the Vascular Quality Initiative. Hospital annual OAR volume was characterized as <5/year, 5-9/year, 10-14/year, and ≥15/year (high volume). Adjusted rates of postoperative morbidity, reoperation, failure to rescue, and mortality in 2014 were compared across volume cohorts. Distance between patients' home zip code and high-volume hospitals was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 21,191 OARs were performed at 1,445 hospitals between 2013 and 2014. The average hospital OAR annual volume was 7.8 (standard deviation [SD] ± 9.3) with a median of 4.5. Among the 1,445 hospitals, only 190 (13.1%) performed ≥15 OARs per year whereas 756 hospitals (53.3%) performed <5 per year. Among patients who underwent OAR in 2014, 5,395 (53.3%) received care at a hospital that performed <15 per year. There was no difference in complication, reoperation, or failure to rescue rates between high-volume and low-volume hospitals. Mortality did not significantly differ among OAR volume cohorts. Hospitals performing <5 OARs per year had a mortality rate of 5.7% compared with 5.6% at high-volume hospitals (P = 0.817). One-quarter of patients who received care at a low-volume hospital would have had to travel more than 60 miles to reach a high-volume hospital. CONCLUSIONS: By conservative estimates, only 13% of hospitals performing OAR meet current volume standards. Triaging all patients to high-volume hospitals would require shifting over 5,000 patients annually with no associated improvement in perioperative outcomes. Implementation of the current OAR hospital volume standard may significantly burden patients and hospitals without improving surgical outcomes.

Association Between Hospital Volume, Processes of Care, and Outcomes in Patients Admitted With Heart Failure: Insights From Get With The Guidelines-Heart Failure.

BACKGROUND: Hospital volume is frequently used as a structural metric for assessing quality of care, but its utility in patients admitted with acute heart failure (HF) is not well characterized. Accordingly, we sought to determine the relationship between admission volume, process-of-care metrics, and short- and long-term outcomes in patients admitted with acute HF. METHODS: Patients enrolled in the Get With The Guidelines-HF registry with linked Medicare inpatient data at 342 hospitals were assessed. Volume was assessed both as a continuous variable, and quartiles based on the admitting hospital annual HF case volume, as well: 5 to 38 (quartile 1), 39 to 77 (quartile 2), 78 to 122 (quartile 3), 123 to 457 (quartile 4). The main outcome measures were (1) process measures at discharge (achievement of HF achievement, quality, reporting, and composite metrics); (2) 30-day mortality and hospital readmission; and (3) 6-month mortality and hospital readmission. Adjusted logistic and Cox proportional hazards models were used to study these associations with hospital volume. RESULTS: A total of 125 595 patients with HF were included. Patients admitted to high-volume hospitals had a higher burden of comorbidities. On multivariable modeling, lower-volume hospitals were significantly less likely to be adherent to HF process measures than higher-volume hospitals. Higher hospital volume was not associated with a difference in in-hospital (odds ratio, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94-1.05; P=0.78) or 30-day mortality (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.01; P=0.26), or 30-day readmissions (hazard ratio, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.00; P=0.10). There was a weak association of higher volumes with lower 6-month mortality (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99; P=0.001) and lower 6-month all-cause readmissions (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95%, CI 0.97-1.00; P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis of a large contemporary prospective national quality improvement registry of older patients with HF indicates that hospital volume as a structural metric correlates with process measures, but not with 30-day outcomes, and only marginally with outcomes up to 6 months of follow-up. Hospital profiling should focus on participation in systems of care, adherence to process metrics, and risk-standardized outcomes rather than on hospital volume itself.

Association of Kidney Transplant Center Volume With 3-Year Clinical Outcomes.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: A robust relationship between procedure volume and clinical outcomes has been demonstrated across many surgical fields. This study assessed whether a center volume-outcome relationship exists for contemporary kidney transplantation, specifically for diabetic recipients, older recipients (aged ≥65 years), and recipients of high kidney donor profile index (KDPI ≥ 85) kidneys. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Adult kidney-only transplant recipients who underwent transplantation between 2009 and 2013 (N = 79,581). EXPOSURES: The primary exposure variable was center volume, categorized into quartiles based on the total kidney transplantation volume. Quartile 1 (Q1) centers performed a mean of fewer than 66 kidney transplantations per year, whereas Q4 centers performed a mean of more than 196 kidney transplantations per year. OUTCOMES: All-cause graft failure and mortality within 3 years of transplantation. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Multivariable Cox frailty models were used to adjust for donor characteristics, recipient characteristics, and cold ischemia time. RESULTS: Minor differences in rates of 3-year deceased donor all-cause graft failure across quartiles of center volume were observed (14.9% for Q1 vs 16.7% for Q4), including in subgroups (diabetic recipients, 18.4% for Q1 vs 19.7% for Q4; older recipients, 19.4% for Q1 vs 22.5% for Q4; recipients of high KDPI kidneys, 26.5% for Q1 vs 26.5% for Q4). Results were similar for 3-year mortality. After adjustment for donor, recipient, and graft characteristics using Cox regression, center volume was not significantly associated with all-cause graft failure or mortality within 3 years, except that diabetic recipients at Q3 centers had slightly lower mortality (compared with Q1 centers, adjusted HR of 0.85 [95% CI, 0.73-0.99]). LIMITATIONS: Potential unmeasured confounding from patient comorbid conditions and organ selection. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide little evidence that care in higher volume centers is associated with better adjusted outcomes for kidney transplant recipients, even in populations anticipated to be at increased risk for graft failure or death.

Hospital Quality Metrics: "America's Best Hospitals" and Outcomes After Ischemic Stroke.

BACKGROUND: Developing quality metrics to assess hospital-level care and outcomes is increasingly popular in the United States. The U.S. News & World Report ranking of "America's Best Hospitals" is an existing, popular hospital-profiling system, but it is unknown whether top-ranked hospitals in their report have better outcomes according to other hospital quality metrics such as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) publicly reported 30-day stroke measures. METHODS: The analysis was based on the 2015-2016 U.S. News & World Report ranking of the 50 top-rated hospitals for neurology and neurosurgery and 2012-2014 CMS Hospital Compare Data. We used mixed models adjusted for hospital characteristics and weighted by hospital volume to compare 30-day risk-standardized mortality and readmission between top-ranked and other hospitals. Among the 50 top-ranked hospitals, we determined whether ranking order was associated with the CMS outcomes. RESULTS: Compared with 2737 other hospitals, the 50 top-ranked hospitals had lower 30-day mortality (14.8% versus 15.3%) but higher readmission (14.5% versus 13.3%). These patterns persisted in adjusted analyses with top-ranked hospitals having .72% (95% confidence interval [CI] -1.09%, -.34%) lower mortality and .41% (95% CI .16%, .67%) higher readmission. Among top-ranked hospitals, rank order was not associated with mortality (.05% decrease in mortality with each rank, 95% CI -.10%, .01%) or readmission (.02% increase; 95% CI -.03%, .06%). CONCLUSION: Admission to a top-ranked hospital for neurology or neurosurgery was associated with lower 30-day risk-standardized mortality but higher readmission after ischemic stroke. There was heterogeneity in outcomes among the 50 top-ranked hospitals.

The influence of procedural volume and proficiency gain on mortality from upper GI endoscopic mucosal resection.

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is established for the management of benign and early malignant upper GI disease. The aim of this observational study was to establish the effect of endoscopist procedural volume on mortality. DESIGN: Patients undergoing upper GI EMR between 1997 and 2012 were identified from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality and secondary outcomes were 90-day mortality, requirement for emergency intervention and elective cancer re-intervention. Risk-adjusted cumulative sum (RA-CUSUM) analysis was used to assess patient mortality risk during initial stage of endoscopist proficiency gain and the effect of endoscopist and hospital volume. Mortality was compared before and after the change point or threshold in the RA-CUSUM curve. RESULTS: 11 051 patients underwent upper GI EMR. Endoscopist procedure volume was an independent predictor of 30-day mortality. Fifty-eight per cent of EMR procedures were performed by endoscopists with annual volume of 2 cases or less, and had a higher 30-day and 90-day mortality rate for patients with cancer, 6.1% vs 0.4% (p<0.001) and 12% vs 2.1% (p<0.001), respectively. The requirement for emergency intervention after EMR for cancer was also greater with low volume endoscopists (1.8% vs 0.1%, p=0.002). In patients with cancer, the RA-CUSUM curve change points for 30-day mortality and elective re-intervention were 4 cases and 43 cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: EMR performed by high volume endoscopists is associated with reduced adverse outcomes. In order to reach proficiency, appropriate training and procedural volume accreditation training programmes are needed nationally.

When high-volume PCI operators in high-volume hospitals move to lower volume hospitals-Do they still maintain high volume and quality of outcomes?

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this quasi-experimental study was to examine whether high-volume percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) operators still maintain high volume and quality of outcomes when they moved to lower volume hospitals. BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews have indicated that high-volume PCI operators and hospitals have higher quality outcomes. However, little is known on whether high PCI volume and high quality outcomes are mainly due to operator characteristics (i.e., skill and experience) and is portable across organizations or whether it is due to hospital characteristics (i.e., equipment, team, and management system) and is less portable. METHODS: We used Taiwan National Health Insurance claims data 2000-2012 to identify 98 high-volume PCI operators, 10 of whom moved from one hospital to another during the study period. We compared the PCI volume, risk-adjusted mortality ratio, and major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) ratio before and after moving. RESULTS: Of the 10 high-volume operators who moved, 6 moved from high- to moderate- or low-volume hospitals, with median annual PCI volumes (interquartile range) of 130 (117-165) in prior hospitals and 54 (46-84) in subsequent hospitals (the hospital the operator moved to), and the remaining 4 moved from high to high-volume hospitals, with median annual PCI volumes (interquartile range) of 151 (133-162) in prior hospitals and 193 (178-239) in subsequent hospitals. No significant differences were observed in the risk-adjusted mortality ratios and MACE ratios between high-volume operators and matched controls before and after moving. CONCLUSIONS: High-volume operators cannot maintain high volume when they moved from high to moderate or low-volume hospitals; however, the quality of care is maintained. High PCI volume and high-quality outcomes are less portable and more hospital bound.

Hospitalization metrics associated with hospital-level variation in inferior vena cava filter utilization for patients with venous thromboembolism in the United States: Implications for quality of care.

Variation in the use of inferior vena cava filters (IVCFs) across hospitals has been observed, suggesting differences in quality of care. Hospitalization metrics associated with venous thromboembolism (VTE) patients have not been compared based on IVCF utilization rates using a national sample. We conducted a descriptive retrospective study using the Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) to delineate the variability of hospitalization metrics across the hospital quartiles of IVCF utilization for VTE patients. The NRD included all-payer administrative inpatient records drawn from 22 states. Adult (≥ 18 years) patients with VTE hospitalizations with or without IVCF were identified from January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2014 and hospitals were divided into quartiles based on the IVCF utilization rate as a proportion of VTE patients. Primary outcome measures were observed rates of in-hospital mortality, 30-day all-cause readmissions and VTE-related readmissions, cost, and length of stay. Patient case-mix characteristics and hospital-level factors by hospital quartiles of IVCF utilization rates, were compared. Overall, 12.29% of VTE patients had IVCF placement, with IVCF utilization ranging from 0% to 46.84%. The highest quartile had fewer pulmonary embolism patients relative to deep vein thrombosis patients, and older patient ages were present in higher quartiles. The highest quartile of hospitals placing IVCFs were more often private, for-profit, and non-teaching. Patient and hospital characteristics and hospitalization metrics varied by IVCF utilization rates, but hospitalization outcomes for non-IVCF patients varied most between quartiles. Future work investigating the implications of IVCF utilization rates as a measure of quality of care for VTE patients is needed.

Assessment of barriers and facilitators in the implementation of appropriate use criteria for elective percutaneous coronary interventions: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The use of inappropriate elective Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) has decreased over time, but hospital-level variation in the use of inappropriate PCI persists. Understanding the barriers and facilitators to the implementation of Appropriate Use Criteria (AUC) guidelines may inform efforts to improve elective PCI appropriateness. METHODS: All hospitals performing PCI in Washington State were categorized by their use of inappropriate elective PCI in 2010 to 2013. Semi-structured, qualitative telephone interviews were then conducted with 17 individual interviews at 13 sites in Washington State to identify barriers and facilitators to the implementation of the AUC guidelines. An inductive and deductive, team-based analytical approach, drawing primarily on Matrix analysis was performed to identify factors affecting implementation of the AUC. RESULTS: Specific facilitators were identified that supported successful implementation of the AUC. These included collaborative catheterization laboratory environments that allow all staff to participate with questions and opinions; ongoing AUC education with catheterization laboratory teams and referring providers; internal AUC peer review processes; interventional cardiologist be directly involved with the pre-procedural review process; checklist-based algorithms for pre-procedural documentation; systems redesign to include insurance companies; and AUC educational information with patients. Barriers to implementation of the AUC included external pressures, such as competition for patients, and the lack of shared medical records with sites that referred patients for coronary angiography. CONCLUSIONS: The identified facilitators enabled sites to successfully implement the AUC. Catheterization laboratories struggling to successfully implement the AUC may consider utilizing these strategies to improve their processes to improve patient selection for elective PCI.

Impact of hospital and surgeon case volume on morbidity in colorectal endometriosis management: a plea to define criteria for expert centers.

National and international guidelines recommend referring patients with severe forms of endometriosis to expert centers. However, there is a lack of clear criteria to define an expert center. We examined the roles of surgeon and hospital procedure volumes as determinants of morbidity in deep infiltrating endometriosis of the rectum and sigmoid colon (DIERS). METHODS: We conducted a French retrospective multicenter study of hospital facilities performing colorectal surgery for DIERS in 2015. The primary end point was to analyze the relation between case volume and the incidence of complications. We estimated the optimal cut-off (OCO) determined by a minimal p-value approach. RESULTS: The study included 56 hospital facilities and collected data of 1135 cases of surgical management of colorectal endometriosis. The mean and median number of procedures per year and per surgeon were 9.17 and 5.58, respectively. The overall rate of grade III-V complication was 7.6% (82/1135). One grade V complication occurred. The rates of rectovaginal fistula, anastomotic leakage, pelvic abscess, and ureteral fistula were: 2.7% (31/1135), 0.79% (9/1135), 3.4% (39/1135), and 0.70% (8/1135), respectively. An OCO of 20 procedures per center and per year (p < 0.001) was defined. The OCO per surgeon and per year varied between seven (p = 0.007) and 13 procedures (p = 0.03). In a multivariate analysis, we found that only the volume of activity was independently correlated to complication outcomes (p = 0.0013). CONCLUSION: Our results contribute to providing objective morbidity data to determine criteria for defining expert centers for colorectal surgery for endometriosis.

Understanding the relationship between the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Hospital Compare star rating, surgical case volume, and short-term outcomes after major cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Both the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) Hospital Compare star rating and surgical case volume have been publicized as metrics that can help patients to identify high-quality hospitals for complex care such as cancer surgery. The current study evaluates the relationship between the CMS' star rating, surgical volume, and short-term outcomes after major cancer surgery. METHODS: National Medicare data were used to evaluate the relationship between hospital star ratings and cancer surgery volume quintiles. Then, multilevel logistic regression models were fit to examine the association between cancer surgery outcomes and both star rankings and surgical volumes. Lastly, a graphical approach was used to compare how well star ratings and surgical volume predicted cancer surgery outcomes. RESULTS: This study identified 365,752 patients undergoing major cancer surgery for 1 of 9 cancer types at 2,550 hospitals. Star rating was not associated with surgical volume (P < .001). However, both the star rating and surgical volume were correlated with 4 short-term cancer surgery outcomes (mortality, complication rate, readmissions, and prolonged length of stay). The adjusted predicted probabilities for 5- and 1-star hospitals were 2.3% and 4.5% for mortality, 39% and 48% for complications, 10% and 15% for readmissions, and 8% and 16% for a prolonged length of stay, respectively. The adjusted predicted probabilities for hospitals with the highest and lowest quintile cancer surgery volumes were 2.7% and 5.8% for mortality, 41% and 55% for complications, 12.2% and 11.6% for readmissions, and 9.4% and 13% for a prolonged length of stay, respectively. Furthermore, surgical volume and the star rating were similarly associated with mortality and complications, whereas the star rating was more highly associated with readmissions and prolonged length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of other information, these findings suggest that the star rating may be useful to patients when they are selecting a hospital for major cancer surgery. However, more research is needed before these ratings can supplant surgical volume as a measure of surgical quality. Cancer 2017;123:4259-4267. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Simulated Regionalization of Heart and Lung Transplantation in the United States.

We simulated the impact of regionalization of isolated heart and lung transplantation within United Network for Organ Sharing (UNOS) regions. Overall, 12 594 orthotopic heart transplantation (OHT) patients across 135 centers and 12 300 orthotopic lung transplantation (OLT) patients across 67 centers were included in the study. An algorithm was constructed that "closed" the lowest volume center in a region and referred its patients to the highest volume center. In the unadjusted analysis, referred patients were assigned the highest volume center's 1-year mortality rate, and the difference in deaths per region before and after closure was computed. An adjusted analysis was performed using multivariable logistic regression using recipient and donor variables. The primary outcome was the potential number of lives saved at 1 year after transplant. In adjusted OHT analysis, 10 lives were saved (95% confidence interval [CI] 9-11) after one center closure and 240 lives were saved (95% CI 209-272) after up to five center closures per region, with the latter resulting in 1624 total patient referrals (13.2% of OHT patients). For OLT, lives saved ranged from 29 (95% CI 26-32) after one center closure per region to 240 (95% CI 224-256) after up to five regional closures, but the latter resulted in 2999 referrals (24.4% of OLT patients). Increased referral distances would severely limit access to care for rural and resource-limited populations.

The Theory and Practice of Pancreatic Surgery in France.

OBJECTIVE: Measure the caseload of pancreatectomies that influences their short-term outcome, at a national level, and assess the applicability of a centralization policy. BACKGROUND: There is agreement that pancreatectomies should be centralized. However, previous studies have failed to accurately define a "high-volume" center. METHODS: French healthcare databases were screened to identify all adult patients who had elective pancreatectomies between 2007 and 2012. The patients' age, comorbidities, indication, and extent of surgery, and also the hospital administrative-type and location were retrieved. The annual-caseload of pancreatectomy was calculated for each hospital facility. The primary endpoint was 90-day mortality. Spline modeling was used to identify the different annual-caseload that influenced mortality. Logistic regressions were performed to assess if their influence was independent of confounders, and the accuracy of the model calculated. RESULTS: Overall, 22,366 patients underwent a pancreatectomy and the mortality was 8.1%. Two cut-offs were identified (25 and 65 per year): compared with centers performing >65 resections per year, the adjusted OR of mortality was 1.865 (1.529-2.276) in centers performing ≤25 resections per year and 1.234 (1.031-1.478) in those performing 26 to 65 resections per year. The average number of facilities performing ≤25, 26 to 65, and >65 pancreatectomies per year was 456, 20, and 9, respectively. The percentage of patients operated in these facilities was 56.6%, 19.9%, and 23.3%, respectively.For pancreaticoduodenectomies (12,670 patients; mortality 9.2%), there were 2 cut-offs (16 and 40 pancreaticoduodenectomies per year), and both were independent predictors of mortality (adjusted OR of 1.979 and 1.333). For distal pancreatectomies (7085 patients; 6.2% mortality), there were 2 cut-offs (13 and 25 distal pancreatectomies per year), but neither was an independent predictor of outcome (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve of the model = 0.778). CONCLUSIONS: Centralization of pancreatic surgery is theoretically justified, but currently unrealizable. As the incidence of pancreatic cancer increases, there is an urgent need to improve the training of surgeons and develop both intermediate and high-volume centers.

Surgeon, not institution, case volume is associated with limb outcomes after lower extremity bypass for critical limb ischemia in the Vascular Quality Initiative.

OBJECTIVE: Studies from large administrative databases have demonstrated associations between institutional case volume and outcomes after lower extremity bypass (LEB). We hypothesized that increased institutional and surgeon volume would be associated with improved outcomes after LEB. Using a national, prospectively collected clinical database, the objective of this study was to determine the effects of both surgeon and institutional volume on outcomes after LEB. METHODS: The Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI) was queried to identify all LEBs for critical limb ischemia or claudication between 2004 and 2014. Average annual case volume was calculated by dividing an institution's or surgeon's total LEB volume by the number of years they reported to the VQI. Institutional and surgeon volumes were analyzed as continuous variables to determine the impact of volume on major adverse cardiac events (MACEs), major adverse limb events (MALEs), graft patency, and amputation-free survival. Hierarchical regression models were used with cases clustered by surgeon and center. Time-dependent outcomes were evaluated with multivariable shared frailty Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: From 2004 to 2014, there were 14,678 LEB operations performed at 114 institutions by 587 surgeons. Average annual institutional volume ranged from 1.0 to 137.5 LEBs per year, with a median of 26.9 (interquartile range, 14-45.3). Average annual surgeon volume ranged from 1 to 52 LEBs per year with a median of 5.7 (interquartile range, 2.5-9.3). Institutional LEB volume was not associated with MACEs or MALEs or with loss of patency. However, average annual surgeon volume was independently associated with reduced MALEs and improved primary patency. Institutional and surgeon volume did not predict MACEs. CONCLUSIONS: In contradistinction to previous studies, there was no relationship in this study between institutional LEB volume and outcomes after LEB. However, greater average annual surgeon volume was associated with improved primary patency and decreased risk of MALEs. Open LEB remains a safe and effective procedure for limb salvage. Limb-related outcomes in critical limb ischemia and claudication will be optimized if surgeons maintain adequate volume of LEB.

Surgical Site Infections: Volume-Outcome Relationship and Year-to-Year Stability of Performance Rankings.

BACKGROUND: Surgical site infection (SSI) rates are publicly reported as quality metrics and increasingly used to determine financial reimbursement. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the volume-outcome relationship as well as the year-to-year stability of performance rankings following coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery and hip arthroplasty. RESEARCH DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries who underwent CABG surgery or hip arthroplasty at US hospitals from 2005 to 2011, with outcomes analyzed through March 2012. Nationally validated claims-based surveillance methods were used to assess for SSI within 90 days of surgery. The relationship between procedure volume and SSI rate was assessed using logistic regression and generalized additive modeling. Year-to-year stability of SSI rates was evaluated using logistic regression to assess hospitals' movement in and out of performance rankings linked to financial penalties. RESULTS: Case-mix adjusted SSI risk based on claims was highest in hospitals performing <50 CABG/year and <200 hip arthroplasty/year compared with hospitals performing ≥200 procedures/year. At that same time, hospitals in the worst quartile in a given year based on claims had a low probability of remaining in that quartile the following year. This probability increased with volume, and when using 2 years' experience, but the highest probabilities were only 0.59 for CABG (95% confidence interval, 0.52-0.66) and 0.48 for hip arthroplasty (95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.55). CONCLUSIONS: Aggregate SSI risk is highest in hospitals with low annual procedure volumes, yet these hospitals are currently excluded from quality reporting. Even for higher volume hospitals, year-to-year random variation makes past experience an unreliable estimator of current performance.

Safety of labour and delivery following closures of obstetric services in small community hospitals.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, many smaller hospitals in British Columbia, Canada, have stopped providing planned obstetric services. We examined the effect of these service closures on the labour and delivery outcomes of pregnant women living in affected communities. METHODS: We used maternal postal codes to identify delivery records (1998-2014) of women residing in a community affected by service closure. The records were obtained from the British Columbia Perinatal Data Registry. We examined the effect of the closures using a within-communities fixed-effects framework and included similar-sized communities without service closures to control for underlying time trends. The primary outcome was a previously published composite measure of labour and delivery safety, the Adverse Outcome Index, which includes adverse events such as birth injury and unanticipated operative procedures, and includes weights for severity of adverse events. Secondary outcomes included maternal or newborn transfer, and use of obstetric interventions. RESULTS: We found little evidence that closure of planned obstetric services affected the risk of composite adverse maternal-newborn outcome (-0.4 excess adverse events per 100 deliveries, 95% confidence interval [CI] -2.0 to 1.1), or most other secondary outcomes. The severity of composite outcome events decreased following the closures (rate ratio 0.58, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.89). Closures were associated with increases in use of epidural analgesia (3.4 excess events per 100 deliveries, 95% CI 0.4 to 6.3) and length of antepartum stay (0.6 h, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.0 h). INTERPRETATION: Closure of planned obstetric services in low-volume hospitals was not associated with an increase or decrease in frequency of adverse events during labour and delivery.

Case Volume and Revisits in Children Undergoing Gastrostomy Tube Placement.

OBJECTIVES: Emergency department (ED) visits and hospital readmissions are common after gastrostomy tube (GT) placement in children. We sought to characterize interhospital variation in revisit rates and explore the association between this outcome and hospital-specific GT case volume. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study from 38 hospitals using the Pediatric Health Information System database. Patients younger than 18 years who had a GT placed in 2010 to 2012 were assessed for a GT-related (mechanical or infectious) ED visit or inpatient readmission at 30 and 90 days after discharge from GT placement. Risk-adjusted rates were calculated using generalized linear mixed-effects models accounting for hospital clustering and relevant demographic and clinical attributes, then compared across hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 15,642 patients were included. A median of 468 GTs were placed in all the 38 hospitals during 3 years (range: 83-891), with a median of 11.4 GT placed per 1000 discharges (range: 2.4-16.7). Median ED visit for each hospital at 30 days after discharge was 8.2% (range: 3.7%-17.2%) and 14.8% at 90 days (range: 6.3%-26.1%). Median inpatient readmissions for each hospital at 30 days after discharge was 3.5% (range: 0.5%-10.5%) and 5.9% at 90 days (range: 1.0%-18.5%). Hospital-specific GT placement per 1000 discharges (rate of GT placement) was inversely correlated with ED visit rates at 30 (P = 0.007) and 90 days (P = 0.020). The adjusted 30- and 90-day readmission rate and the adjusted 30- and 90-day ED return rates decreased with increasing GT insertion rate (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Higher hospital GT insertion rates are associated with lower ED revisit rates but not inpatient readmissions.

Cancer Center Volume and Type Impact Stage-Specific Utilization of Neoadjuvant Therapy in Rectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant chemoradiation reduces local recurrence in locally advanced rectal cancer, and adherence to national and societal recommendations remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: To determine variability in guideline adherence in rectal cancer treatment and investigate whether hospital volume correlated with variability seen. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective analysis using the National Cancer Database rectal cancer participant user files from 2005 to 2010. Stage-specific predictors of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation use were determined, and variation in use across hospitals analyzed. Hospitals were ranked based on likelihood of preoperative therapy use by stage, and observed-to-expected ratios for neoadjuvant therapy use calculated. Hospital outliers were identified, and their center characteristics compared. RESULTS: A total of 23,488 patients were identified at 1183 hospitals. There was substantial variability in the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation across hospitals. Patients managed outside clinical guidelines for both stage 1 and stage 3 disease tended to receive treatment at lower-volume, community cancer centers. CONCLUSIONS: There is substantial variability in adherence to national guidelines in the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation for rectal cancer across all stages. Both hospital volume and center type are associated with over-treatment of early-stage tumors and under-treatment of more invasive tumors. These findings identify a clear need for national quality improvement efforts in the treatment of rectal cancer.