Dataset Information

Hospital experience predicts outcomes after high-risk geriatric surgery.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Geriatric patients require specialized perioperative care, yet the impact of geriatric surgery proportion (a measure of experience) and geriatric surgery volume, on clinical outcomes is unknown. This study analyzes the association between proportion and volume and clinical outcomes after high-risk geriatric surgery.

Methods

Using the 2014 National Inpatient Sample, hospital encounters for older adults (≥65 years) undergoing high-risk geriatric surgery were identified. Geriatric surgery volume was defined as a hospital's annual volume of geriatric patients undergoing high-risk geriatric surgery. Geriatric surgery proportion was calculated as volume divided by the sum of high-risk surgeries in all ages. Hierarchical multivariable regression models identified predictors of inpatient mortality, postoperative length of stay, and discharge to nursing facility.

Results

There were an estimated 514,950 hospital encounters for older adults undergoing high-risk geriatric surgery from 3,115 hospitals. Mean proportion was 0.53 ± 0.19; median volume was 60 cases per year, ranging from 5 to 3,235. After adjustment, comparing the 90th to 10th percentiles, higher proportion was associated with decreased mortality (odds ratio [95% confidence interval] 0.81 [0.73-0.88]; P < .001) and shorter postoperative length of stay (-4.44% (-5.49 to -3.39%); P < .0001). Higher volume was not associated with mortality but was associated with longer length of stay (7.76% [6.75-8.77%]; P < .0001) and decreased discharge to nursing facility (0.87 [0.79-0.95]; P= .003).

Conclusion

Treatment of geriatric patients at hospitals with the highest proportion of high-risk geriatric surgery, or the most experience, is associated with improved outcomes. High-proportion hospitals should be examined to understand the mechanisms by which better quality geriatric surgical care is achieved, while lower-proportion hospitals may be targets for quality improvement efforts.

SUBMITTER: Dworsky JQ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8019519 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceVarious clinical societies and patient advocacy organizations continue to encourage minimum volume standards at hospitals that perform certain high-risk operations. Although many clinicians and quality and safety experts believe this can improve outcomes, the extent to which hospitals have responded to these discretionary standards remains unclear.ObjectiveTo evaluate the association between short-term clinical outcomes and hospitals' adherence to the Leapfrog Group's minimum volume standards for high-risk cancer surgery.Design, setting, and participantsLongitudinal cohort study using 100% of the Medicare claims for 516 392 patients undergoing pancreatic, esophageal, rectal, or lung resection for cancer between January 1, 2005, and December 31, 2016. Data were accessed between December 1, 2018, and April 30, 2019.ExposuresHigh-risk cancer surgery in hospitals meeting and not meeting the minimum volume standards.Main outcomes and measuresPatients having surgery in hospitals meeting the volume standard and 30-day and in-hospital mortality and complication rates.ResultsOverall, a total of 516 392 procedures (47 318 pancreatic resections, 29 812 esophageal resections, 116 383 rectal resections, and 322 879 lung resections) were included in the study, and patient mean (SD) age was 73.1 (7.5) years. Outcomes improved over time in both hospitals meeting and not meeting the minimum volume standards. Mortality after pancreatic resection decreased from 5.5% in 2005 to 4.8% in 2016 (P for trend <.001). Mortality after esophageal resection decreased from in 6.7% 2005 to 5.0% in 2016 (P for trend <.001). Mortality after rectal resection decreased from 3.6% in 2005 to 2.7 % in 2016 (P for trend <.001). Mortality after lung resection decreased from 4.2% in 2005 to 2.7 % in 2016 (P for trend <.001). Throughout the study period, there were no statistically significant differences in risk-adjusted mortality between hospitals meeting and not meeting the volume standards for esophageal, lung, and rectal cancer resections. Mortality rates after pancreatic resection were consistently lower at hospitals meeting the volume standard, although mortality at all hospitals decreased over the study period. For example, in 2016, risk-adjusted mortality rates for hospitals meeting the volume standard were 3.8% (95% CI, 3.3%-4.3%) compared with 5.7% (95% CI, 5.1%-6.5%) for hospitals that did not. Although an increasing majority of patients underwent surgery in hospitals meeting the Leapfrog volume standards over time, the overall proportion of hospitals meeting the standards in 2016 ranged from 5.6% for esophageal resection to 23.3% for pancreatic resection.Conclusions and relevanceAlthough volume remains an important factor for patient safety, the Leapfrog Group's minimum volume standards did not differentiate hospitals based on mortality for 3 of the 4 high-risk cancer operations assessed, and few hospitals were able to meet these standards. These findings highlight important tradeoffs between setting effective volume thresholds and practical expectations for hospital adherence and patient access to centers that meet those standards.

Project description:There were numerous efforts in the United States during the previous decade to concentrate selected surgical procedures in high-volume hospitals. It remains unknown whether referral patterns for high-risk surgery have changed as a result and how operative mortality has been affected.We used national Medicare data to study patients undergoing one of eight different cancer and cardiovascular operations from 1999 through 2008. For each procedure, we examined trends in hospital volume and market concentration, defined as the proportion of Medicare patients undergoing surgery in the top decile of hospitals by volume per year. We used regression-based techniques to assess the effects of volume and market concentration on mortality over time, adjusting for case mix.Median hospital volumes of four cancer resections (lung, esophagus, pancreas, and bladder) and of repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rose substantially. Depending on the procedure, higher hospital volumes were attributable to an increasing number of cases nationwide, an increasing market concentration, or both. Hospital volumes rose slightly for aortic-valve replacement but fell for coronary-artery bypass grafting and carotid endarterectomy. Operative mortality declined for all eight procedures, ranging from a relative decline of 8% for carotid endarterectomy (1.3% mortality in 1999 and 1.2% in 2008) to 36% for AAA repair (4.4% in 1999 and 2.8% in 2008). Higher hospital volumes explained a large portion of the decline in mortality for pancreatectomy (67% of the decline), cystectomy (37%), and esophagectomy (32%), but not for the other procedures.Operative mortality with high-risk surgery fell substantially during the previous decade. Although increased market concentration and hospital volume have contributed to declining mortality with some high-risk cancer operations, declines in mortality with other procedures are largely attributable to other factors. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging.).

Project description:ImportancePalliative care has the potential to improve care for patients and families undergoing high-risk surgery.ObjectiveTo characterize the use of perioperative palliative care and its association with family-reported end-of-life experiences of patients who died within 90 days of a high-risk surgical operation.Design, setting, and participantsThis secondary analysis of administrative data from a retrospective cross-sectional patient cohort was conducted in the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Healthcare System. Patients who underwent any of 227 high-risk operations between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2015, were included.ExposuresPalliative-care consultation within 30 days before or 90 days after surgery.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcomes were family-reported ratings of overall care, communication, and support in the patient's last month of life. The VA surveyed all families of inpatient decedents using the Bereaved Family Survey, a valid and reliable tool that measures patient and family-centered end-of-life outcomes.ResultsA total of 95 204 patients underwent high-risk operations in 129 inpatient VA Medical Centers. Most patients were 65 years or older (69 278 [72.8%]), and the most common procedures were cardiothoracic (31 157 [32.7%]) or vascular (23 517 [24.7%]). The 90-day mortality rate was 6.0% (5740 patients) and varied by surgical subspecialty (ranging from 278 of 7226 [3.8%] in urologic surgery to 875 of 6223 patients [14.1%] in neurosurgery). A multivariate mixed model revealed that families of decedents who received palliative care were 47% more likely to rate overall care in the last month of life as excellent than those who did not (odds ratio [OR], 1.47 [95% CI, 1.14-1.88]; P = .007), after adjusting for patient's characteristics, surgical subspecialty of the high-risk operation, and survey nonresponse. Similarly, families of decedents who received palliative care were more likely to rate end-of-life communication (OR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.09-1.87]; P = .004) and support (OR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.01-1.71]; P = .05) components of medical care as excellent. Of the entire cohort, 3374 patients (3.75%) had a palliative care consultation, and 770 patients (0.8%) received it before surgery. Of all decedents, 1632 (29.9%) had a palliative care consultation, with 319 (5.6%) receiving it before surgery.Conclusions and relevanceReceipt of a palliative consultation was associated with better ratings of overall end-of-life care, communication, and support, as reported by families of patients who died within 90 days of high-risk surgery. Yet only one-third of decedents was exposed to palliative care. Expanding integration of perioperative palliative care may benefit patients undergoing high-risk operations and their families.