Potential Impact of "Take the Volume Pledge" on Access and Outcomes for Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery.


Journal

Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
12 2019
Historique:
pubmed: 27 4 2018
medline: 21 3 2020
entrez: 27 4 2018
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

To quantify the number of US hospitals that would meet "Take the Volume Pledge" (TVP) volume thresholds and compare outcomes at hospitals meeting and not meeting TVP thresholds. TVP aims to regionalize complex cancer resections to hospitals meeting established annual average volume thresholds. There is little data describing the potential impact on patient access if this initiative were broadly implemented or the relationship between these volume thresholds and quality of oncologic care. Hospitals in the National Cancer Database (2006-2012) performing esophagectomy (n = 968), proctectomy (n = 1250), or pancreatectomy (n = 1068) were categorized based on frequency meeting TVP thresholds: always low volume (LV); low annual average and intermittently low volume (ILV); high annual average and intermittently high volume (IHV); always high volume (HV). Multivariable generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate the association between hospital TVP category, oncologic care processes, and perioperative outcomes. Few hospitals met annual TVP thresholds (HV or IHV)-esophagectomy 1.6%; proctectomy 19.7%; pancreatectomy 6.6%. The majority of esophagectomy (77.8%) and pancreatectomy (53.4%) and 48.1% of proctectomy patients received care at hospitals not meeting annual TVP thresholds (LV or ILV). While performance for all three procedures was generally better at ILV, IHV, and HV hospitals relative to LV hospitals, there were few differences (none of which were consistent) when comparing ILV, IHV, and HV hospitals to each other. Few hospitals would meet TVP volume thresholds for complex cancer resections with little difference in outcomes between ILV, IHV, and HV hospitals. While a policy to regionalize complex surgical care may have merit, it could also compromise patient autonomy and limit access to care if patients are unable or unwilling to travel.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVE
To quantify the number of US hospitals that would meet "Take the Volume Pledge" (TVP) volume thresholds and compare outcomes at hospitals meeting and not meeting TVP thresholds.
SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA
TVP aims to regionalize complex cancer resections to hospitals meeting established annual average volume thresholds. There is little data describing the potential impact on patient access if this initiative were broadly implemented or the relationship between these volume thresholds and quality of oncologic care.
METHODS
Hospitals in the National Cancer Database (2006-2012) performing esophagectomy (n = 968), proctectomy (n = 1250), or pancreatectomy (n = 1068) were categorized based on frequency meeting TVP thresholds: always low volume (LV); low annual average and intermittently low volume (ILV); high annual average and intermittently high volume (IHV); always high volume (HV). Multivariable generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate the association between hospital TVP category, oncologic care processes, and perioperative outcomes.
RESULTS
Few hospitals met annual TVP thresholds (HV or IHV)-esophagectomy 1.6%; proctectomy 19.7%; pancreatectomy 6.6%. The majority of esophagectomy (77.8%) and pancreatectomy (53.4%) and 48.1% of proctectomy patients received care at hospitals not meeting annual TVP thresholds (LV or ILV). While performance for all three procedures was generally better at ILV, IHV, and HV hospitals relative to LV hospitals, there were few differences (none of which were consistent) when comparing ILV, IHV, and HV hospitals to each other.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Few hospitals would meet TVP volume thresholds for complex cancer resections with little difference in outcomes between ILV, IHV, and HV hospitals. While a policy to regionalize complex surgical care may have merit, it could also compromise patient autonomy and limit access to care if patients are unable or unwilling to travel.

Identifiants

pubmed: 29697444
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002796
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

1079-1089

Auteurs

Ryan C Jacobs (RC)

Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.

Shawn Groth (S)

Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.

Farhood Farjah (F)

Division of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.

Mark A Wilson (MA)

Department of Surgery, VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, PA.

Laura A Petersen (LA)

VA HSR&D Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX.
Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.

Nader N Massarweh (NN)

Michael E. DeBakey Department of Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX.
VA HSR&D Center for Innovations in Quality, Effectiveness and Safety, Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, TX.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH