Patient survival after surgical treatment of rectal cancer: impact of surgeon and hospital characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Surgeon and hospital factors are associated with the survival of patients treated for rectal cancer. The relative contribution of each of these factors toward determining outcomes is poorly understood. METHODS: We used data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database to analyze the outcomes of patients aged 65 years and older undergoing operative treatment for nonmetastatic rectal cancer, diagnosed in the United States between 1998 and 2007. These data were linked to a registry to identify whether the treating surgeon was a board-certified colorectal surgeon versus a noncolorectal surgeon. Hospital volume and hospital certification as a National Cancer Institute-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers were also analyzed. The primary outcome of interest was long-term survival. RESULTS: Our data source yielded 6432 patients. Initial analysis demonstrated improved long-term survival in patients treated by higher-volume colorectal surgeons, higher-volume hospitals, teaching hospitals, and National Cancer Institute (NCI)-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers. Based on an iterative approach to modeling the interactions between these various factors, we found a robust effect of surgeon subspecialty status, hospital volume, and NCI designation. Surgeon volume was not distinctly associated with long-term survival. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated for rectal cancer by board-certified colorectal surgeons in centers that are higher volume and/or NCI-designated Comprehensive Cancer Centers experience better overall survival. These differences persist after adjustment for a broad range of patient and contextual risk factors, including surgeon volume. Patients and payers can use these results to identify surgeons and hospitals where outcomes are most favorable.

Measuring the quality of colorectal cancer screening: the importance of follow-up.

PURPOSE: As evidence mounts for effectiveness, an increasing proportion of the United States population undergoes colorectal cancer screening. However, relatively little is known about rates of follow-up after abnormal results from initial screening tests. This study examines patterns of colorectal cancer screening and follow-up within the nation's largest integrated health care system: the Veterans Health Administration. METHODS: We obtained information about patients who received colorectal cancer screening in the Veterans Health Administration from an existing quality improvement program and from the Veterans Health Administration's electronic medical record. Linking these data, we analyzed receipt of screening and follow-up testing after a positive fecal occult blood test. RESULTS: A total of 39,870 patients met criteria for colorectal cancer screening; of these 61 percent were screened. Screening was more likely in patients aged 70 to 80 years than in those younger or older. Female gender (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.9-0.95), Black race (relative risk, 0.92; 95 percent confidence interval, 0.89-0.96), lower income, and infrequent primary care visits were associated with lower likelihood of screening. Of those patients with a positive fecal occult blood test (n = 313), 59 percent received a follow-up barium enema or colonoscopy. Patient-level factors did not predict receipt of a follow-up test. CONCLUSIONS: The Veterans Health Administration rates for colorectal cancer screening are significantly higher than the national average. However, 41 percent of patients with positive fecal occult blood tests failed to receive follow-up testing. Efforts to measure the quality of colorectal cancer screening programs should focus on the entire diagnostic process.