Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Volume–Outcome Relationship: Don’t Believe Everything You See

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 13 October 2006

Abstract

This paper investigates methodological limitations of the volume–outcome relationship. A brief overview of quality measurement is followed by a discussion of two important aspects of the relationship.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Epstein AM. Volume and outcome—it is time to move ahead. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002;346:1161–1164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin M. How Is Volume Related to Quality in Health Care? A Systematic Review of the Research Literature. Washington, DC, National Institute of Medicine, 2000

    Google Scholar 

  3. Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R, et al. Selective referral to high-volume hospitals: estimating potentially avoidable deaths. J. A. M. A. 2000;283:1159–1166

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. http://www.leapfroggroup.org

  5. Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson EV, Birkmeyer CM. Volume standards for high-risk surgical procedures: potential benefits of the Leapfrog initiative. Surgery 2001;130:415–422

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Birkmeyer JD. Should we regionalize major surgery? Potential benefits and policy considerations. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2000;190:341–349

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Gordon TA, Bowman HM, Tielsch JM, et al. Statewide regionalization of pancreaticoduodenectomy and its effect on in-hospital mortality. Ann. Surg. 1998;228:71–78

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Russell TR. Invited commentary: Volume standards for high-risk operations: an American College of Surgeons’ view. Surgery 2001;130:423–424

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Dudley RA, Johansen KL. Invited commentary: physician responses to purchaser quality initiatives for surgical procedures. Surgery 2001;130:425–428

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Khuri SF. Invited commentary: Surgeons, not General Motors, should set standards for surgical care. Surgery 2001;130:429–431

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Daley J. Invited commentary: Quality of care and the volume–outcome relationship—what’s next for surgery? Surgery 2002;131:16–18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Luft HS, Hunt SS, Maerki SC. The volume–outcome relationship: practice-makes-perfect or selective referral patterns? Health Serv. Res. 1987;22:157–182

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Donabedian A. The quality of care: how can it be assessed? J. A. M. A. 1988;1988:1743–1748

    Google Scholar 

  14. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of healthcare. Millbank Mem. Fund Q. 1966;44:S166–S206

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jencks SF, Cuerdon T, Burwen DR, et al. Quality of medical care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries: a profile at state and national levels. J. A. M. A. 2000;284:1670–1676

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Palmer RH. Process-based measures of quality: the need for detailed clinical data in large health care databases. Ann. Intern. Med. 1997;127:733–738

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Palmer RH. Using health outcomes data to compare plans, networks, and providers. Int. J. Quality Healthcare 1998;10:477–483

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Khuri SF, Najjar SF, Daley J, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes between teaching and nonteaching hospitals in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Ann. Surg. 2001;234:370–382;discussion 382–383

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Fraser I. Volume thresholds and hospital characteristics in the United States. Health Aff (Millwood) 2003;22:167–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Hannan EL, Popp AJ, Feustel P, et al. Association of surgical specialty and processes of care with patient outcomes for carotid endarterectomy. Stroke 2001;32:2890–2897

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Pitt HA, Murray KP, Bowman HM, et al. Clinical pathway implementation improves outcomes for complex biliary surgery. Surgery 1999;126:751–756;discussion 756–758

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Pearson SD, Kleefield SF, Soukop JR, et al. Critical pathways intervention to reduce length of hospital stay. Am. J. Med. 2001;110:175–180

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sesperez J, Wilson S, Jalaludin B, et al. Trauma case management and clinical pathways: prospective evaluation of their effect on selected patient outcomes in five key trauma conditions. J. Trauma 2001;50:643–639

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Kim MH, Rachwal W, McHale C, et al. Effect of amiodarone +/− diltiazem +/− beta blocker on frequency of atrial fibrillation, length of hospitalization, and hospital costs after coronary artery bypass grafting. Am. J. Cardiol. 2002;89:1126–1128

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. O’Connor GT, Plume SK, Olmstead EM, et al. A regional intervention to improve the hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. J. A. M. A. 1996;275:841–846

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The Department of Veterans Affairs’ NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann. Surg. 1998;228:491–507

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Daley J, Henderson WG, Khuri SF. Risk-adjusted surgical outcomes. Ann. Rev. Med. 2001;52:275–287

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hannan EL, Radzyner M, Rubin D, et al. The influence of hospital and surgeon volume on in-hospital mortality for colectomy, gastrectomy, and lung lobectomy in patients with cancer. Surgery 2002;131:6–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Cebul RD, Snow RJ, Pine R, et al. Indications, outcomes, and provider volumes for carotid endarterectomy. J. A. M. A. 1998;279:1282–1287

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Hannan EL, O’Donnell JF, Kilburn H Jr., et al. Investigation of the relationship between volume and mortality for surgical procedures performed in New York State hospitals. J. A. M. A. 1989;262:503–510

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hannan EL, Popp AJ, Tranmer B, et al. Relationship between provider volume and mortality for carotid endarterectomies in New York State. Stroke 1998;29:2292–2297

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Munoz E, Mulloy K, Goldstein J, et al. Costs, quality, and the volume of surgical oncology procedures. Arch. Surg. 1990;125:360–363

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Christian CK, Gustafson ML, Betensky RA, et al. The leapfrog volume criteria may fall short in identifying high quality surgical centers. Ann. Surg. 2003;238:447–455

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. http://www.uhc.edu.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 75 Francis Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA

    Caprice K. Christian M.D., M.P.H., Michael L. Gustafson M.D., M.B.A. & Michael J. Zinner M.D.

  2. Department of Biostatistics, Harvard School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Ave., Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA

    Rebecca A. Betensky Ph. D

  3. Tenet Healthcare System, 13737 Noel Rd., Suite 100, Dallas, Texas 75240, USA

    Jennifer Daley M.D.

  4. Department of Community and Family Medicine, Dartmouth Medical School, Hinman Box 7250, Strasenburg Hall, Hanover, New Hampshire 03755, USA

    Jennifer Daley M.D.

Authors
  1. Caprice K. Christian M.D., M.P.H.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael L. Gustafson M.D., M.B.A.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rebecca A. Betensky Ph. D
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jennifer Daley M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael J. Zinner M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Zinner M.D..

Additional information

An erratum to this article is available athttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00268-006-0738-5.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Christian, C.K., Gustafson, M.L., Betensky, R.A. et al. The Volume–Outcome Relationship: Don’t Believe Everything You See. World J. Surg. 29, 1241–1244 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7993-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7993-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation