Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 105, Issue 2, pp 117–132 | Cite as

Provider’s volume and quality of breast cancer detection and treatment

  • Nicole Hébert-CroteauEmail author
  • Danièle Roberge
  • Jacques Brisson
Review Paper


For many health conditions, the process or result of medical procedures improves with increasing caseload. The evidence about breast cancer has not been thoroughly assessed. This review synthesizes the literature about provider’s volume and performance in either breast cancer screening with mammography or treatment. Articles published in English between 1990 and 2006 were identified by a computerized search and by review of reference lists. In screening with mammography, the reading volume of the radiologist and the screening volume of the facility influence different components of performance. The most conclusive evidence for breast cancer treatment concerns the association between the surgeon’s caseload and the process or end-results of therapeutic interventions. Although the mechanisms of these associations still need to be clarified, large provider’s volume in screening mammography or breast cancer treatment is often related to the quality of medical interventions.


Breast neoplasm Hospital Performance Physician Radiologist Screening mammography Treatment 



We thank Doctor Marie-Claude Messely for helpful comments on the preliminary version of the manuscript and Martin Croteau for editorial assistance.


  1. 1.
    Hillner BE, Smith TJ, Desch CE (2000) Hospital and physician volume or specialization and outcomes in cancer treatment: importance in quality cancer care. J Clin Oncol 18:2327–2340PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kizer KW (2003) The volume-outcome conundrum. New Engl J Med 349:2159–2161PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hébert-Croteau N, Brisson J, Pineault R (2000) Review of organizational factors related to care offered to women with breast cancer. Epi Rev 22:228–238Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Malin JL, Schuster MA, Kahn KA et al (2002) Quality of breast cancer care: what do we know? J Clin Oncol 20:4381–4393PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR (2002) Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med 137:511–520PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE et al (2003) Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. New Engl J Med 349:2117–2127PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Luft HS, Hunt SS, Maerki SC (1987) The volume-outcome relationship: practice-makes-perfect or selective referral patterns? HSR 22:157–182PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lipscomb J (2006) Transcending the volume-outcome relationship in cancer care. J Natl Cancer Inst 98:151–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hébert-Croteau N, Brisson J, Latreille J et al (2004) Compliance with consensus recommendations for treatment improves survival of women with node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 22:3685–3693PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hébert-Croteau N, Brisson J, Lemaire J et al (2005) Investigating the correlation between hospital of primary treatment and the survival of women with breast cancer. Cancer 104:1343–1348PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Birkmeyer NJO, Goodney PP, Stukel TA et al (2005) Do cancer centers designated by the National Cancer Institute have better surgical outcomes? Cancer 103:435–441PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Elmore JG, Wells CK, Howard DH (1998) Does diagnostic accuracy in mammography depend on radiologist’s experience? J Women’s Health 7:443–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ciatto S, Ambrogetti D, Catarzi S et al (1999) Proficiency test for screening mammography: results for 117 volunteer Italian radiologists. J Med Screen 6:149–151PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kan L, Olivotto IA, Warren Burhenne LJ et al (2000) Standardized abnormal interpretation and cancer detection ratios to assess reading volume and reader performance in a breast screening program. Radiology 215:563–567PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yankaskas BC, Cleveland RJ, Schell MJ et al (2001) Association of recall rates with sensitivity and positive predictive values of screening mammography. AJR 177:543–549PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Blanks RG, Bennett RL, Wallis MG et al (2002) Does individual programme size affect screening performance? Results from the United Kingdom NHS breast screening programme. J Med Screen 9:11–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Esserman L, Cowley H, Eberle C et al (2002) Improving the accuracy of mammography: volume and outcome relationship. J Natl Cancer Inst 94:369–375PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Beam CA, Conant EF, Sickles EA (2003) Association of volume and volume-independent factors with accuracy in screening mammography interpretation. J Natl Cancer Inst 95:282–290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Barlow WE, Chi C, Carney PA et al (2004) Accuracy of screening mammography interpretation by characteristics of radiologists. J Natl Cancer Inst 96:1840–1850PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Théberge I, Hébert-Croteau N, Langlois A et al (2005) Volume of screening mammography and performance in the Quebec population-based Breast Cancer Screening program. CMAJ 172:195–199PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Smith-Bindman R, Chu P, Miglioretti DL et al (2005) Physician predictors of mammographic accuracy. J Natl Cancer Inst 97:358–367PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rickard M, Taylor R, Page A et al (2006) Cancer detection and mammography volume of radiologists in a population-based screening programme. The Breast 15:39–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Coldman AJ, Major D, Doyle GP et al. (2006) Organized breast screening programs in Canada: effect of radiologist reading volumes on outcomes. Radiology 238:809–815PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moss SM, Blanks RG, Bennett RL (2005) Is radiologists’ volume of mammography reading related to accuracy? A critical review of the literature. Clin Radiol 60:623–626PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sickles EA, Wolverton DE, Dee KE (2002) Performance parameters for screening and diagnostic mammography: specialist and general radiologist. Radiology 224:861–869PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Elmore JG, Carney PA (2002) Does practice make perfect when interpreting mammography? J Natl Cancer Inst 94:321–323PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Elmore JG, Miglioretti DL, Carney PA (2003) Does practice make perfect when interpreting mammography? Part II. J Natl Cancer Inst 95:250–252PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Egglin TK, Feinstein AR (1996) Context bias. A problem in diagnostic radiology. JAMA 276:1752–1755PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Allgood PC, Bachmann MO (2006) Effects of specialisation on treatment and outcomes in screen-detected breast cancers in Wales: cohort study. Br J Cancer 94:36–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Boffetta P, Merletti F, Winkelmann R et al (1993) Survival of breast cancer patients from Piedmont, Italy. Cancer Causes Control 4:209–215PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bonett A, Roder D, Esterman A (1991) Case-survival rates for infiltrating ductal carcinomas by category of hospital at diagnosis in South Australia. Med J Aust 154:695–697PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Grilli R, Mainini F, Penna A et al (1993) Inappropriate Halsted mastectomy and patient volume in Italian hospitals. Am J Public Health 83:1762–1764PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Grilli R, Repetto F (1995) Variation in use of breast-conserving surgery in Lombardia, Italy. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 11:733–740PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Guadagnoli E, Weeks JC, Shapiro CL et al (1998) Use of breast-conserving surgery for treatment of stage I and stage II breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:101–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Guadagnoli E, Shapiro CL, Weeks JC et al (1998) The quality of care for treatment of early stage breast carcinoma. Cancer 83:302–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Guller U, Safford S, Pietrobon R et al (2005) High hospital volume is associated with better outcomes for breast cancer surgery: analysis of 233,247 patients. World J Surg 29:994–1000PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hébert-Croteau N, Brisson J, Latreille J et al (1999) Variations in the treatment of early-stage breast cancer in Quebec between 1988 and 1994. CMAJ 161:951–955PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hébert-Croteau N, Brisson J, Latreille J et al (1999) Compliance with consensus recommendations for the treatment of early stage breast carcinoma in elderly women. Cancer 85:1104–1113PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hand R, Sener S, Imperato J et al (1991) Hospital variables associated with quality of care for breast cancer patients. JAMA 266:3429–3432PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Harcourt KF, Hicks KL (2003) Is there a relationship between case volume and survival in breast cancer? Am J Surg 185:407–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hillner BE, Penberthy L, Desch CE et al (1996) Variation in staging and treatment of local and regional breast cancer in the elderly. Breast Cancer Res Treat 40:75–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Hiotis K, Ye W, Sposto R et al (2005) Predictors of breast conservation therapy—Size is not all that matters. Cancer 103:892–899PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hynes DM (1994) The quality of breast cancer care in local communities: implications for health care reform. Med Care 32:328–340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hynes DM, Weaver F, Morrow M et al (2004) Breast cancer surgery trends and outcomes: results from a National Department of Veterans Affairs study. J Am Coll Surg 198:707–716PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Iscoe NA, Goel V, Wu K et al (1994) Variation in breast cancer surgery in Ontario. Can Med Assoc J 150:345–352Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Johantgen ME, Coffey RM, Harris DR et al (1995) Treating early-stage breast cancer: hospital characteristics associated with breast-conserving surgery. Am J Public Health 85:1432–1434PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Kotwall CA, Covington DL, Rutledge R et al (1996) Patient, hospital, and surgeon factors associated with breast conservation surgery. Ann Surg 224:419–429PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Lee-Feldstein A, Anton-Culver H, Feldstein PJ (1994) Treatment differences and other prognostic factors related to breast cancer survival. JAMA 271:1163–1168PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Ma M, Bell J, Campbell SB et al (1997) Breast cancer management: is volume related to quality? Br J Cancer 75:1652–1659PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    McKee MD, Cropp MD, Hyland A et al (2002) Provider case volume and outcome in the evaluation and treatment of patients with mammogram-detected breast carcinoma. Cancer 95:704–712PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Nattinger AB, Gottlieb MS, Veum J et al (1992) Geographic variation in the use of breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer. New Engl J Med 326:1102–1107PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Nattinger AB, Gottlieb MS, Hoffman RG et al (1996) Minimal increase in use of breast-conserving surgery from 1986 to 1990. Med Care 34:479–489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Roohan PJ, Bickell NA, Baptiste MS et al (1998) Hospital volume differences and five-year survival from breast cancer. Am J Public Health 88:454–457PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Satariano ER, Swanson GM, Moll PP (1992) Nonclinical factors associated with surgery received for treatment of early-stage breast cancer. Am J Public Health 82:195–198PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Scorpiglione N, Nicolucci A, Grilli R et al (1995) Appropriateness and variation of surgical treatment of breast cancer in Italy: when excellence in clinical research does not match with generalized good quality care. J Clin Epidemiol 48:345–352PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Skinner KA, Helsper JT, Deapen D et al (2003) Breast cancer: do specialists make a difference? Ann Surg Oncol 10:606–615PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Stefoski Mikeljevic J, Haward RA, Johnston C et al (2003) Surgeon workload and survival from breast cancer. Br J Cancer 89:487–491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Tanaka H, Hiyama T, Hanai A et al (1994) Interhospital differences in cancer survival: magnitude and trend in 1975–1987 in Osaka, Japan. Jpn J Cancer Res 85:680–685PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Taylor R, Stubbs JM, Langlands AO et al (1999) Predictors of mastectomy for women with breast cancer in the Greater Western Region of Sydney. The Breast 5:116–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ahn H-S, Yoon S-J, Jo H-Y et al (2006) Association between unplanned readmission rate and volume of breast cancer operation cases. Int J Clin Pract 60:32–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Shen N, Mayo NE, Scott SC et al (2003) Factors associated with pattern of care before surgery for breast cancer in Quebec between 1992 and 1997. Medical Care 41:1353–1366PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Garreau JR, Nelson J, Cook D et al (2005) Geographic variation in sentinel node adaptation br practicing surgeons in Oregon. Am J Surg 189:616–620PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Legorreta AP, Liu X, Parker RG (2000) Examining the use of breast-conserving treatment for women with breast cancer in a managed care environment. Am J Clin Oncol 23:438–441PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Simunovic M, Thériault M-E, Paszat L et al (2005) Using administrative databases to measure waiting times for patients undergoing major cancer surgery in Ontario, 1993–2000. Can J Surg 48:137–142PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Jubelirer SJ, Harpold R, Miller S et al (2001) An analysis of factors determining the use of breast conserving surgery for treating early-stage breast cancer. W V Med J 97:144–147PubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Byrne MJ, Jamrozik K, Parsons RW et al (1993) Breast cancer in Western Australia in 1989. II. Diagnosis and primary management. Aust N Z J Surg 63:624–629PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dixon JM, Ravisekar O, Cunningham M et al (1996) Factors affecting outcome of patients with impalpable breast cancer detected by breast screening. Br J Surg 83:997–1001PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Ferguson CM, Feinstein AC, Pendergrast WJ (1990) Determinants of primary therapy of early stage breast cancer. J of MAG 79:351–354Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Goy JCM, Dobbs HJ, Henderson S et al (1998) Variation in referral pattern for postoperative radiotherapy of patients with screen-detected breast cancer in the South Thames (East) region. Clin Oncol 10:24–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Hislop TG, Olivotto IA, Coldman AJ et al (1996) Variations in breast conservation surgery for women with axillary lymph node negative breast cancer in British Columbia. Revue Canadienne de Santé Pub 87:390–394Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Ingram DM, McEvoy SP, Byrne MJ et al (2005) Surgical caseload and outcomes for women with invasive breast cancer treated in Western Australia. The Breast 14:11–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Luther SL, Studnicki J (2001) Physician practice volume and alternative surgical treatment for breast cancer in Florida. HSR 36:166–179PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Moritz S, Bates T, Henderson SM et al (1997) Variation in management of small invasive breast cancers detected on screening in the former South East Thames region: observational study. BMJ 315:1266–1272PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Neuner JM, Gilligan MA, Sparapani R et al (2004) Decentralization of breast cancer surgery in the United States. Cancer 101:1323–1329PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Olivotto IA, Coldman AJ, Hislop TG et al (1997) Compliance with practice guidelines for node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 15:216–222PubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Porter GA, McMulkin-Tait H (2004) Practice patterns in breast cancer surgery: Canadian perspective. World J Surg 28:80–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Sainsbury R, Haward B, Rider L et al (1995) Influence of clinician workload and patterns of treatment on survival from breast cancer. Lancet 345:1265–1270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Staradub VL, Hsieh Y-C, Clauson J et al (2002) Factors that influence surgical choices in women with breast carcinoma. Cancer 95:1185–1190PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Stevenson JM, Bochenek P, Jamrozik K et al (1997) Breast cancer in Western Australia in 1989 V: Outcome at 5 years after diagnosis. Aust N Z J Surg 67:250–255PubMedGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Twelves CJ, Thomson CS, Dewar JA et al (1998) Variation in the survival of women with breast cancer in Scotland. Br J Cancer 78:566–571PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Twelves CJ, Thomson CS, Dewar JA et al (2001) Variation in survival of women with breast cancer: Health Board remains a factor at 10 years. Br J Cancer 85:637–640PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    White V, Pruden M, Giles G et al (2004) The management of early breast carcinoma before and after the introduction of clinical practice guidelines. Cancer 101:476–485PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Mor V, Laliberte LL, Petrisek AC et al (2000) Impact of breast cancer treatment guidelines on surgeon practice patterns: results of a hospital-based intervention. Surgery 128:847–861PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Najafi M, Ebrahimi M, Kaviani A et al (2005) Breast conserving surgery versus mastectomy: cancer practice by general surgeons in Iran. BMC Cancer 5:35–39PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Posther KE, McCall LM, Blumencranz PW et al (2005) Sentinel node skills verification and surgeon performance- Data from a multicenter clinical trial for early-stage breast cancer. Ann Surg 242:593–602PubMedGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Hislop TG, Coldman AJ, Olivotto IA et al (2003) Local and regional therapy for women with breast cancer in British Columbia. The Breast 9:192–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (2005) Effects of chemotherapy and hormonal therapy for early breast cancer on recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomized trials. Lancet 365:1687–1717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Hébert-Croteau N, Brisson J, Lemaire J et al (2005) The benefit of participating to clinical research. Breast Cancer Res Treat 91:279–281PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Smith TJ, Hillner BE, Bear HD (2006) Taking action on the volume-quality relationship: how long can we hide our heads in the colostomy bag? J Natl Cancer Inst 95:695–698Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    Meyer AD, Tsui AS, Hinings CR (1993) Configurational approaches to organisational analysis. Acad Manage J 36:1175–1195CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nicole Hébert-Croteau
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Danièle Roberge
    • 2
  • Jacques Brisson
    • 3
    • 4
  1. 1.Direction des systèmes de soins et servicesInstitut national de santé publique du QuébecMontréalCanada
  2. 2.Centre de rechercheHôpital Charles LeMoyneGreenfield ParkCanada
  3. 3.Unité de recherche en santé des populations, Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de QuébecQuebecCanada
  4. 4.Direction des systèmes de soins et servicesInstitut national de santé publique du Québec Ste. FoyCanada

Personalised recommendations