Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 110, Issue 2, pp 349–356 | Cite as

Does high surgeon and hospital surgical volume raise the five-year survival rate for breast cancer? A population-based study

  • Chin-Shyan Chen
  • Tsai-Ching Liu
  • Herng-Ching Lin
  • Yung-Chang Lien
Epidemiology

Abstract

This study sets out to examine the relationship between both surgeon and hospital volume and five-year survival rates for breast cancer patients. We performed Cox proportional hazard regressions on a pooled population-based database linking the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database with the ‘cause of death’ data file, covering the three-year period from January 1997 to December 1999. Of the 13,360 breast cancer resection patients in our study sample, the five-year survival rates, by surgeon volume, were 77.3% in the high-volume group (>201 cases), 76.9% in the medium-volume group (45–200), and 69.5% in the low-volume group (≤44). The five-year survival rates, by hospital volume, were 77.3% for high-volume hospitals (>585 cases), 74.5% for medium-volume hospitals (259–585) and 72.1% for low-volume hospitals (≤258). Cox regression analyses show that the risk of death for patients treated by low-volume surgeons was up to 1.305 times (P < 0.001) as high as the risk for those treated by high-volume surgeons. Similarly, the risk of death for patients whose resections had been performed in low-volume hospitals was 1.484 times (P < 0.001) as high as the risk for those whose resections had been performed in high-volume hospitals. High surgeon or hospital volume contributes significantly to patient outcomes and may be regarded as an overall indicator of high treatment quality; we therefore strongly recommend that the healthcare authorities reveal to the public all of the relevant information on provider performance and caseloads in order to assist them to make the optimum choice when surgery becomes necessary.

Keywords

Breast cancer surgery Surgical volume Survival Taiwan 

References

  1. 1.
    Public Health Annual Report in Taiwan R.O.C. [in Chinese]. Executive Yuan, Taipei, Taiwan: Department of Health; 1997–2006, Taipei, TaiwanGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chie WC, Chang SH, Huang CS, Tzeng SJ, Chen JH, Fan BY, Chang KJ (2002) Prognostic factors for the survival of Taiwanese breast cancer patients. J Formos Med Assoc 101:98–103PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sainsbury R, Haward B, Rider L, Johnston C, Round C (1995) Influence of clinician workload and patterns of treatment on survival from breast cancer. Lancet 345:1265–1270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gillis CR, Hole DJ (1996) Survival outcome of care by specialist surgeons in breast cancer: a study of 3786 patients in the west of Scotland. BMJ 312:145–148PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Roohan PJ, Bickell NA, Baptiste MS, Therriault GD, Ferrara EP, Siu AL (1998) Hospital volume differences and five-year survival from breast cancer. Am J Public Health 88:454–457PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Harcourt KF, Hicks KL (2003) Is there a relationship between case volume and survival in breast cancer? Am J Surg 185:407–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nomura E, Tsukuma H, Ajiki W, Ishikawa O, Oshima A (2006) Population-based study of the relationship between hospital surgical volume and 10-year survival of breast cancer patients in Osaka, Japan. Cancer Sci 97:618–622PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hillner BE, Smith TJ, Desch CE (2000) Hospital and physician volume or specialization and outcomes in cancer treatment: importance in quality of cancer care. J Clin Oncol 18:2327–2340PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EV, Stukel TA, Lucas FL, Batista I, Welch HG, Wennberg DE. (2002) Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 346:1128–1137PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hebr-Croteau N, Brisson J, Pineault R (2000) Review of organizational factors related to care offered to women with breast cancer. Epidemiol Rev 22:228–238Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hannan EL (1999) The relation between volume and outcome in health care. N Engl J Med 340:1677–1679PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Théberge I, Hébert-Croteau N, Langlois A, Major D, Brisson J (2005) Volume of screening mammography and performance in the Quebec population-based Breast Cancer Screening Program. CMAJ 172:195–199PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Simunovic M, Rempel E, Thériault ME, Coates A, Whelan T, Holowaty E, Langer B, Levine M (2006) Influence of hospital characteristics on operative death and survival of patients after major cancer surgery in Ontario. Can J Surg 49:251–258PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Skinner KA, Helsper JT, Deapen D, Ye W, Sposto R (2003) Breast cancer: do specialists make a difference. Ann Surg Oncol 185:407–410Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Webb PM, Cummings MC, Bain CJ, Furnival CM (2004) Changes in survival after breast cancer: improvements in diagnosis or treatment? Breast 13:7–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Stefoski Mikeljevic J, Haward RA, Johnston C, Sainsbury R, Forman D (2003) Surgeon workload and survival from breast cancer. Br J Cancer 89:487–491PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR (2002) Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review an methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med 137:511–520PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Chin-Shyan Chen
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tsai-Ching Liu
    • 2
    • 3
  • Herng-Ching Lin
    • 4
  • Yung-Chang Lien
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of EconomicsNational Taipei UniversityTaipeiTaiwan
  2. 2.Taipei Municipal Wan Fang HospitalTaipeiTaiwan
  3. 3.Department of Public FinanceNational Taipei UniversityTaipeiTaiwan
  4. 4.School of Health Care AdministrationTaipei Medical UniversityTaipeiTaiwan
  5. 5.Department of General SurgeryTaipei Medical University and HospitalTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations