Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Hospital Volume and Patient Outcomes in Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Surgery: Is Assessing Differences in Mortality Enough?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery Aims and scope

Abstract

Background

The impact of regionalization on morbidity, failure to rescue (FTR), length of stay (LOS), and readmission remains unclear. We sought to examine hospital-volume-related differences in outcomes following complex hepato-pancreatico-biliary (HPB) surgery and define potential benefits of regionalization across quality metrics.

Methods

Patients undergoing HPB surgery in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare linked data from 1986 to 2002 were identified. Hospital volume was stratified into tertiles (low volume [LV] <4 cases/year; intermediate volume [IV] 4–10 cases/year; high volume [HV] ≥11 cases/year). The incidence of complications, FTR (mortality following a complication), and LOS was compared across hospital-volume strata. A counterfactual model examined hypothetical outcomes assuming all patients had been treated at HV centers.

Results

Ten thousand two hundred eight patients underwent pancreatic (46.1 %), hepatic (36.2 %), or biliary (17.8 %) procedures. Overall mean age ranged from 72.7 years at HV centers to 73.4 at LV centers (P < 0.001), and patients at HV centers (75.4 %) were more likely to have ≥3 comorbidities versus IV (70.0 %) or LV (64.7 %) centers (P < 0.001). The incidence of post-operative complications was lower at HV (39.1 %) compared with IV (41.9 %) or LV (44.8 %) centers. Major complications included hemorrhagic anemia (7.3 %), failure to thrive (5.1 %), and respiratory infection/failure (3.5 %); each was less common in HV hospitals (P < 0.05). FTR after major complication tended to be higher at LV (36.7 %) and IV (37.3 %) hospitals compared with HV hospitals (29.7 %) (P = 0.10). Mortality was higher at LV (10.5 %) and IV (8.1 %) hospitals versus HV centers (5.4 %) (P < 0.001). HV hospital patients had shorter median LOS (10 days) compared with IV (12 days) or LV (12 days) hospital patients (P < 0.001). Readmission varied across centers (HV 19.1 % vs. IV 19.2 % vs. 16.7 %; P = 0.02). In a counterfactual model with all patients treated at a HV center, 6.4 % fewer complications and a 26.0 % increase in post-complication rescue would be expected, along with a 32.0 % reduction in index mortality and an 8.1 % reduction in total patient-days. A minor increase in readmissions (7.1 %) would be anticipated with 13.3 % fewer deaths during readmission.

Conclusion

Although patients treated at HV hospitals had more medical comorbidities, outcomes across a wide spectrum of quality metrics were better than at IV or LV hospital following complex HPB surgery. A 20–30 % reduction in morbidity and mortality and an 8 % reduction in hospital patient-days could be anticipated had all patients been treated at HV hospitals.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson SR, Tosteson AN, Sharp SM, Warshaw AL, Fisher ES. Effect of hospital volume on in-hospital mortality with pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 1999 Mar;125(3):250–6.

  2. Gouma DJ, van Geenen RC, van Gulik TM, de Haan RJ, de Wit LT, Busch OR, Obertop H. Rates of complications and death after pancreaticoduodenectomy: risk factors and the impact of hospital volume. Ann Surg. 2000 Dec;232(6):786–95

  3. Birkmeyer JD, Skinner JS, Wennberg DE. Will volume-based referral strategies reduce costs or just save lives? Health Aff (Millwood). 2002 Sep-Oct;21(5):234–41.

  4. Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med. 1979 Dec 20;301(25):1364–9

  5. Bunker JP, Luft HS, Enthoven A. Should surgery be regionalized? Surg Clin North Am. 1982 Aug;62(4):657–68.

  6. Birkmeyer JD, Lucas FL, Wennberg DE. Potential benefits of regionalizing major surgery in Medicare patients. Eff Clin Pract. 1999 Nov-Dec;2(6):277–83.

  7. Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson EV, Birkmeyer CM. Volume standards for high-risk surgical procedures: potential benefits of the Leapfrog initiative. Surgery. 2001 Sep;130(3):415–22.

  8. Kim DH, Cha JK, Bae HJ, Park HS, Choi JH, Kang MJ, Kim BG, Huh JT, Kim SB. Organized Comprehensive Stroke Center is Associated with Reduced Mortality: Analysis of Consecutive Patients in a Single Hospital. J Stroke. 2013 Jan;15(1):57–63.

  9. Albright KC, Savitz SI, Raman R, Martin-Schild S, Broderick J, Ernstrom K, Ford A, Khatri R, Kleindorfer D, Liebeskind D, Marshall R, Merino JG, Meyer DM, Rost N, Meyer BC. Comprehensive stroke centers and the ‘weekend effect’: the SPOTRIAS experience. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2012;34(5–6):424–9.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kwon S, Wang B, Wong E, Alfonso-Cristancho R, Sullivan SD, Flum DR. The impact of accreditation on safety and cost of bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2013 Sep-Oct;9(5):617–22.

  11. Flum DR, Kwon S, MacLeod K, Wang B, Alfonso-Cristancho R, Garrison LP, Sullivan SD; Bariatric Obesity Outcome Modeling Collaborative. The use, safety and cost of bariatric surgery before and after Medicare‘s national coverage decision. Ann Surg. 2011 Dec;254(6):860–5.

  12. Hollenbeck BK, Dunn RL, Miller DC, Daignault S, Taub DA, Wei JT. Volume-based referral for cancer surgery: informing the debate. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Jan 1;25(1):91–6.

  13. Liu JH, Etzioni DA, O‘Connell JB, Maggard MA, Ko CY. Using volume criteria: do California hospitals measure up? J Surg Res. 2003 Jul;113(1):96–101.

  14. Reames BN, Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Hospital Volume and Operative Mortality in the Modern Era. Ann Surg. 2013 Dec 23.

  15. Nathan H, Cameron JL, Choti MA, Schulick RD, Pawlik TM. The volume-outcomes effect in hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: hospital versus surgeon contributions and specificity of the relationship. J Am Coll Surg. 2009 Apr;208(4):528–38. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.01.007.

  16. Schneider EB, Hyder O, Wolfgang CL, Dodson RM, Haider AH, Herman JM, Pawlik TM. Provider versus patient factors impacting hospital length of stay after pancreaticoduodenectomy. Surgery. 2013 Aug;154(2):152–61. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2013.03.013.

  17. Rubin D. Estimating Causal Effects of Treatments in Randomized and Nonrandomized Studies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1974;66 (5):688–701.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Pearl J. Causal inference in statistics: An overview. Statistics Surveys. 2009;3:96–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Greenland S, Brumback B. An overview of relations among causal modelling methods. Int J Epidemiol 2002;31:1030–1037.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pearl J. Probabilities of causation: three counterfactual interpretations and their identifications. Synthese 1999;121:93–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Höfler M. Causal inference based on counterfactuals. BMC Medical Research Methodology 2005;5:28

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Brooke BS, Dominici F, Pronovost PJ, Makary MA, Schneider E, Pawlik TM. Variations in surgical outcomes associated with hospital compliance with safety practices. Surgery. 2012 May;151(5):651–9.

  23. Ghaferi AA, Dimick JB. Variation in mortality after high-risk cancer surgery: failure to rescue. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2012 Jul;21(3):389–95.

  24. Ghaferi AA, Birkmeyer JD, Dimick JB. Complications, failure to rescue, and mortality with major inpatient surgery in medicare patients. Ann Surg. 2009 Dec;250(6):1029–34.

  25. Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R, Rennie DJ, Milstein A. Selective referral to high-volume hospitals: estimating potentially avoidable deaths. JAMA 2000;283:1159–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Payment policy for inpatient readmissions. In: Report to the Congress: Promoting Greater Efficiency in Medicare. June 2007:102–120. Available at http://www.medpac.gov/documents/jun07_entirereport.pdf. Accessed January 29, 2014.

  27. FY 2013 Final Rule, Inpatient Prospective Payment Systems, Medicare Program. Federal Register. 2012;77:170.

  28. American College of Surgeons: Committee on Trauma. Optimal hospital resources for care of the seriously injured. Bull Am Coll Surg. 1976 Sep;61(9):15–22. [No authors listed]

  29. American College of Surgeons: Committee on Trauma. Hospital resources for optimal care of the injured patient. Prepared by a Task force of the Committee on Trauma of the American College of Surgeons. Bull Am Coll Surg. 1979 Aug;64(8):43–8. [No authors listed]

  30. Mackenzie EJ, Rivara FP, Jurkovich GJ, Nathens AB, Frey KP, Egleston BL, Salkever DS, Weir S, Scharfstein DO. The National Study on Costs and Outcomes of Trauma. J Trauma. 2007 Dec;63(6 Suppl):S54–67; discussion S81–6.

  31. Shackford SR, Mackersie RC, Davis JW, Wolf PL, Hoyt DB. Epidemiology and pathology of traumatic deaths occurring at a Level I Trauma Center in a regionalized system: the importance of secondary brain injury. J Trauma. 1989 Oct;29(10):1392–7.

  32. Anderson GM, Lomas J. Regionalization of coronary artery bypass surgery. Effects on access. Med Care. 1989 Mar;27(3):288–96

  33. Menke TJ, Wray NP. Cost implications of regionalizing open heart surgery units. Inquiry. 1999 Spring;36(1):57–67.

  34. Shahian DM, Normand SL. Comparison of “risk-adjusted” hospital outcomes. Circulation. 2008 Apr 15;117(15):1955–63.

  35. Pawlik TM, Tanabe KK. Is it ethical to send patients to low-volume hospitals for cancer surgery? Virtual Mentor. 2007 Jan 1;9(1):44–7.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, 21287, USA

    Eric B. Schneider, Aslam Ejaz, Gaya Spolverato, Kenzo Hirose, Martin A. Makary, Christopher L. Wolfgang, Nita Ahuja, Matthew Weiss & Timothy M. Pawlik

Authors
  1. Eric B. Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aslam Ejaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Gaya Spolverato
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kenzo Hirose
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Martin A. Makary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christopher L. Wolfgang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Nita Ahuja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Matthew Weiss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Timothy M. Pawlik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy M. Pawlik.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schneider, E.B., Ejaz, A., Spolverato, G. et al. Hospital Volume and Patient Outcomes in Hepato-Pancreatico-Biliary Surgery: Is Assessing Differences in Mortality Enough?. J Gastrointest Surg 18, 2105–2115 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-014-2619-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11605-014-2619-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation