The volume and outcome relationship for thyroidectomy in England.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
The delivery of surgical care in England has seen a momentum towards centralisation within larger volume hospitals and surgical teams. The aim of this study was to investigate outcomes in England in relationship to hospital and surgeon annual volumes for total thyroidectomy.Methods
Data were extracted from the Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) database for England. A 6-year period (April 2012-March 2018 inclusive) for all adult admissions for thyroidectomy was used in the analysis. The primary outcome measure used was a length of hospital stay greater than 2 days or an emergency readmission within 30 days following surgery. This was used as a proxy for surgical complications. A multilevel modelling strategy was used to adjust for hierarchy and potentially confounding.Results
Data for 22,823 total thyroidectomies across 144 hospital trusts were used for analysis. For total thyroidectomy, larger volume surgeons had reduced levels of post-surgical complications; length of stay > 2 and > 4 days; emergency readmission at 30 days; and hypoparathyroidism, vocal cord palsy, stridor, and tracheostomy at 1-year post-surgery. Larger hospital volume was associated with lower levels of emergency readmission at 30 days and hypoparathyroidism at 1 year.Conclusions
There is significant correlation between surgeon volume and clinical outcome for total thyroidectomy. The relationship was approximately linear, and a low-volume threshold could not be defined.
SUBMITTER: Gray WK
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8188540 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:IntroductionHospital centralization effect is reported to lower complications and mortality for high risk and complex surgery operations, including colorectal surgery. However, no linear relation between volume and outcome has been demonstrated. Aim of the study was to evaluate the increased surgical volume effect on early outcomes of patient undergoing laparoscopic restorative anterior rectal resection (ARR).MethodsA retrospective analysis of all consecutive patients undergoing ARR with primary anastomosis between November 2016 and December 2020 after centralization of rectal cancer cases in an academic Centre. Short-term outcomes are compared to those of patients operated in the same unit during the previous 10 years before service centralization. The primary outcome was estimated anastomotic leak rate. Mean operative time, need of conversion, postoperative use of blood transfusion, radicality, in-hospital stay, number and type of complications, readmission and reoperation rate, mortality and 1-year and stoma persistence rates were evaluated as secondary outcomes.Results86 patients were operated in the study period and outcomes compared to those of 101 patients operated during the previous ten years. Difference in volume of surgery was significant between the two periods (p 0.019) and the estimated leak rate was significantly lower in the higher volume unit (p 0.047). Mean operative time, need of conversion, postoperative use of blood transfusion and in-hospital stay (p < 0.05) were also significantly reduced in Group A.ConclusionThis study suggests that the shift toward higher volume in rectal cancer surgery is associated to decreased anastomotic leak rate. Potentiation of lower volume surgical units may yield optimal perioperative outcomes.
| S-EPMC8777490 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundStudies of the hospital volume-outcome relationship have highlighted that a greater volume activity improves patient outcomes. While this finding has been known for years, most studies to date have failed to delve into what underlies this relationship.ObjectiveThis study aimed to shed light on the basis of the hospital volume effect on patient outcomes by comparing treatment modalities for epithelial ovarian carcinoma patients.DataAn exhaustive dataset of 355 patients in first-line treatment for Epithelial Ovarian Carcinoma (EOC) in 2012 in three regions of France was used. These regions account for 15% of the metropolitan French population.MethodsIn the presence of endogeneity induced by a reverse causality between hospital volume and patient outcomes, we used an instrumental variable approach. Hospital volume of activity was instrumented by the distance from patients' homes to their hospital, the population density, and the median net income of patient municipalities.ResultsBased on our parameter estimates, we found that the rate of complete tumor resection would increase by 15.5 percentage points with centralized care, and by 8.3 percentage points if treatment decisions were coordinated by high-volume centers compared to decentralized care.ConclusionAs volume alone is an imperfect correlate of quality, policy-makers need to know what volume is a proxy for in order to devise volume-based policies.
| S-EPMC8760746 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the relationship between hospital volume and outcome by focusing on alternative measures of volume that capture specialization and overall throughput of hospitals.Data sources/study settingHospital administrative data from the state of Victoria, Australia; data contain 1,798,474 admitted episodes reported by 135 public and private acute-care hospitals.Study designThis study contrasts the volume-outcome relationship using regression models with different measures of volume; two-step and single-step risk-adjustment methods are used.Data collection/extraction methodsThe sample is restricted to ischemic heart disease (IHD) patients (ICD-10 codes: I20-I25) admitted during 2001/02 to 2004/05.Principal findingsOverall hospital throughput and degree of specialization display more substantive implications for the volume-outcome relationship than conventional caseload volume measure. Two-step estimation when corrected for heteroscedasticity produces comparable results to single-step methods.ConclusionsDifferent measures of volume could lead to vastly different conclusions about the volume-outcome relationship. Hospital specialization and throughput should both be included as measures of volume to capture the notion of size, focus, and possible congestion effects.
| S-EPMC4693841 | biostudies-literature
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To examine the causal effect of a hospital's experience with treating hip fractures (volume) on patient treatment outcomes. DATA SOURCES:We use a full sample of administrative data from German hospitals for 2007. The data provide detailed information on patients and hospitals. We also reference the hospitals' addresses and the zip codes of patients' place of residence. STUDY DESIGN:We apply an instrumental variable approach to address endogeneity concerns due to reverse causality and unobserved patient heterogeneity. As instruments for case volume, we use the number of potential patients and number of other hospitals in the region surrounding each hospital. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Our results indicate that after applying an instrumental variables (IV) regression of volume on outcome, volume significantly increases quality. CONCLUSIONS:We provide evidence for the practice-makes-perfect hypothesis by showing that volume is a driving factor for quality.
| S-EPMC5785314 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We ask whether Medicare's Hospital Compare random effects model correctly assesses acute myocardial infarction (AMI) hospital mortality rates when there is a volume-outcome relationship.Medicare claims on 208,157 AMI patients admitted in 3,629 acute care hospitals throughout the United States.We compared average-adjusted mortality using logistic regression with average adjusted mortality based on the Hospital Compare random effects model. We then fit random effects models with the same patient variables as in Medicare's Hospital Compare mortality model but also included terms for hospital Medicare AMI volume and another model that additionally included other hospital characteristics.Hospital Compare's average adjusted mortality significantly underestimates average observed death rates in small volume hospitals. Placing hospital volume in the Hospital Compare model significantly improved predictions.The Hospital Compare random effects model underestimates the typically poorer performance of low-volume hospitals. Placing hospital volume in the Hospital Compare model, and possibly other important hospital characteristics, appears indicated when using a random effects model to predict outcomes. Care must be taken to insure the proper method of reporting such models, especially if hospital characteristics are included in the random effects model.
| S-EPMC2965498 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Gastroschisis is a congenital anomaly that needs surgical management for repositioning intestines into the abdominal cavity and for abdominal closure. Higher hospital or surgeon volume has previously been found to be associated with better clinical outcomes for different especially high-risk, low volume procedures. Therefore, we aim to examine the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for gastroschisis. METHODS:We will perform a systematic literature search from inception onwards in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL, and Biosis Previews without applying any limitations. In addition, we will search trial registries and relevant conference proceedings. We will include (cluster-) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective or retrospective cohort studies analyzing the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and clinical outcomes. The primary outcomes will be survival and mortality. Secondary outcomes will be different measures of morbidity (e.g., severe gastrointestinal complications, gastrointestinal dysfunctions, and sepsis), quality of life, and length of stay. We will systematically assess risk of bias of included studies using RoB 2 for individually or cluster-randomized trials and ROBINS-I for cohort studies, and extract data on the study design, patient characteristics, case-mix adjustments, statistical methods, hospital and surgeon volume, and outcomes into standardized tables. Title and abstract screening, full text screening, critical appraisal, and data extraction of results will be conducted by two reviewers independently. Other data will be extracted by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second one. Any disagreements will be resolved by discussion. We will not pool results statistically as we expect included studies to be clinically and methodologically very diverse. We will conduct a systematic synthesis without meta-analysis and use GRADE for assessing the certainty of the evidence. DISCUSSION:Given the lack of a comprehensive summary of findings on the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for gastroschisis, this systematic review will put things right. Results can be used to inform decision makers or clinicians and to adapt medical care. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:Open Science Framework (DOI: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EX34M ; https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HGPZ2 ).
| S-EPMC7469094 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionEven if a positive volume-outcome correlation in surgery is mostly admitted in many surgical fields, the various ways to assess this relationship make it difficult for researchers and policymakers to use it. Our aim is therefore to provide an overview of the way hospital volume-outcome relationship was assessed. Through this overview, our goal is to identify potential gaps in the assessment of this relationship, to help researchers who want to pursue work in this field and, ultimately, to help policy makers interpret such analyses.Methods and analysisThis review will be conducted using the six stages of the scoping review method: identifying the research question, searching for relevant studies, selecting studies, data extraction, collating, summarising and reporting the results and concluding. This review will address all the key questions used to assess the volume-outcome relationship in surgery.Primary research papers investigating the hospital volume-outcome relationship from 2009 will be included. Studies only looking at surgeons' volume-outcome relationship or studies were the volume variable is not individualisable will be excluded.Both MEDLINE and Scopus will be searched along with grey literature. Two researchers will perform all the stages of the review: screen the titles and abstracts, review the full text of selected articles to determine final inclusions and extract the data. The results will be summarised quantitatively using numerical counts.Ethical considerations and disseminationReviews of published articles are considered secondary analysis and do not need ethical approval. The findings will be disseminated through multiple channels like conferences and peer-reviewed journals.
| S-EPMC7539612 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCongenital diaphragmatic hernia is a rare and life-threatening anomaly that occurs during fetal development and results in an incomplete or incorrect formation of the diaphragm. Surgical therapy of the diaphragm should be performed after clinical stabilization of the neonate. Higher hospital or surgeon volume has previously been found to be associated with better clinical outcomes for different especially high-risk, low-volume procedures. Therefore, we aim to examine the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for congenital diaphragmatic hernia.MethodsThis systematic review protocol has been designed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocol. We will perform a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and Biosis Previews without applying any limitations. In addition, we will search for relevant conference abstracts. We will screen titles and abstracts of retrieved studies, obtain potentially relevant full texts, and assess the eligibility of those full texts against our inclusion criteria. We will include comparative studies analyzing the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and clinical outcomes. We will systematically assess risk of bias of included studies and extract data on the study design, patient characteristics, case-mix adjustments, statistical methods, hospital and surgeon volume, and outcomes into standardized tables. Title and abstract screening, full-text screening, critical appraisal, and data extraction of results will be conducted by two reviewers independently. Other data will be extracted by one reviewer and checked for accuracy by a second one. Any disagreements will be resolved by discussion. We will not perform a meta-analysis as we expect included studies to be clinically and methodologically very diverse. We will synthesize findings from primary studies in a structured narrative way and using GRADE.DiscussionGiven the lack of a comprehensive summary of findings on the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for congenital diaphragmatic hernia, this systematic review will put things right. Results can be used to inform decision makers or clinicians and to adapt medical care.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO ( CRD42018090231 ).
| S-EPMC6234699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The purpose of this study was to systematically review the research on volume and outcome relationships in critical care.From January 1, 2001, to April 30, 2014, MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched for studies assessing the relationship between admission volume and clinical outcomes in critical illness. Bibliographies were reviewed to identify other articles of interest, and experts were contacted about missing or unpublished studies. Of 127 studies reviewed, 46 met inclusion criteria, covering seven clinical conditions. Two investigators independently reviewed each article using a standardized form to abstract information on key study characteristics and results.Overall, 29 of the studies (63%) reported a statistically significant association between higher admission volume and improved outcomes. The magnitude of the association (mortality OR between the lowest vs highest stratum of volume centers), as well as the thresholds used to characterize high volume, varied across clinical conditions. Critically ill patients with cardiovascular (n = 7, OR = 1.49 [1.11-2.00]), respiratory (n = 12, OR = 1.20 [1.04-1.38]), severe sepsis (n = 4, OR = 1.17 [1.03-1.33]), hepato-GI (n = 3, OR = 1.30 [1.08-1.78]), neurologic (n = 3, OR = 1.38 [1.22-1.57]), and postoperative admission diagnoses (n = 3, OR = 2.95 [1.05-8.30]) were more likely to benefit from admission to higher-volume centers compared with lower-volume centers. Studies that controlled for ICU or hospital organizational factors were less likely to find a significant volume-outcome relationship than studies that did not control for these factors.Critically ill patients generally benefit from care in high-volume centers, with more substantial benefits in selected high-risk conditions. This relationship may in part be mediated by specific ICU and hospital organizational factors.
| S-EPMC4493880 | biostudies-other
Project description:ImportanceAlthough the association between annual surgeon total thyroidectomy volume and clinical outcomes is well established, published methods typically group surgeons into volume categories. The volume-outcomes association is likely continuous, but little is known about the point at which the annual surgeon procedure volumes begin to be associated with a decrease in complication rates.ObjectiveTo model the volume-outcomes association as a continuous function and identify the point at which increasing surgeon volume begins yielding better outcomes.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study was conducted in 2018 to 2019 on 10 546 patients from 2 Kaiser Permanente regions (Northern and Southern California), who underwent total thyroidectomy from January 1, 2008, through December 31, 2015, and were followed up through December 31, 2017. The association between annual surgeon procedure volume and outcomes was modeled with analyses that accounted for an association of unknown form and surgeon-specific effects, after adjusting for sociodemographics, prior-year utilization, and multiple comorbidities. Data were analyzed from October 2018 to April 2019.ExposureTotal thyroidectomy.Main outcomes and measuresPresence or absence of transient and permanent hypoparathyroidism and vocal cord paralysis (VCP) in relation to surgeon volume of total thyroidectomies.ResultsOf 10 546 patients in this study, 8500 (81.0%) were male and 4877 (46.2%) aged 45 to 64 years. Surgeons with annual volumes of 1 to 9 total thyroidectomies operated on 2912 patients (27.7%), those with an annual volume of 10 to 19 operated on 3404 (32.6%), and those with an annual volume of 20 or more operated on the remaining 4232 (40.6%). During 2008-2015, a mean of 53.5 (range, 46-198) thyroidectomies were performed each year by surgeons with an annual volume of 40 or more procedures. A generalized additive model showed that the occurrence rates of VCP and hypoparathyroidism began to decrease at annual surgeon procedure volumes of 18.2 (95% CI, 15.0-21.5) and 18.1 (95% CI, 13.8-21.3) procedures per year, respectively. The model revealed a subsequent increase in complication rates for transient VCP. With the use of a refined model, statistically significant decreases were noted in the occurrence rates of complications as annual surgeon volumes increased. Among all 10 546 patients who underwent total thyroidectomy, 632 (6.0%) experienced transient hypoparathyroidism and 170 (1.6%) experienced permanent hypoparathyroidism, whereas 440 (4.2%) experienced transient VCP and 182 (1.7%) experienced permanent VCP. Absolute decreases in complication rates when all surgeons had modeled minimum annual procedure volumes greater than 40 were low, ranging from 0.6% for permanent VCP and hypoparathyroidism to 1.5% for transient hypoparathyroidism.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, occurrence rates of transient and permanent hypoparathyroidism and VCP appeared to decrease as the annual surgeon procedure volume increased, but the absolute decrease may be modest if the affected health system already has low complication rates. Shifting patients to higher-volume surgeons to realize these reductions may be of variable attractiveness in systems with low baseline complication rates.
| S-EPMC6659159 | biostudies-literature