Abstract
Subspecialization has changed the way that general surgery is practiced. Hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery (HPB) is maturing as a subspecialty. The objective of this study was to identify the current levels of practice, self-assessments of adequacy of training, referral patterns, and perceptions regarding regionalization of HPB care to high-volume centers. A total of 240 nonstratified general surgeons from across Canada were randomly selected to receive a survey developed by an expert work group. A reference group of 10 HPB specialists were also polled for a total of 250 respondents. The overall response rate was 73% (182 responders). Subspecialty training had been completed by 65% of respondents. This included surgical oncology (15%), HPB (15%), HPB and transplant (8%), laparoscopy (7%), liver transplantation (5%), and other (50%). This training was obtained in Canada (51%), the United States (35%), Europe (11%), and Australia (3%). Ninety-five percent of responders believed that some HPB services should be regionalized. Similarly, most responders thought that they were not adequately trained to perform these procedures. The following were especially considered subspecialty procedures: major hepatectomy (93%), pancreaticoduodenectomy (90%), and biliary reconstruction (79%). The majority of non-HPB surgeons do not consider themselves adequately trained to perform complex HPB procedures. Furthermore, most surgeons think that major hepatectomy, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and biliary reconstruction should be referred to HPB specialists at high-volume centers.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Hannan EL, O’Donnell JF, Kilburn H, et al. Investigation of the relationship between volume and mortality for surgical procedures performed in New York State hospitals. JAMA 1989;262:503–510.
Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? N Engl J Med 1979;310:1364–1369.
Begg CB, Cramer LD, Hoskins WJ, Brennan MF. Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery. JAMA 1998;280:1747–1751.
Glasgow RE, Showstack JA, Katz PP, et al. The relationship between hospital volume and outcomes of hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinoma. Arch Surg 1999;134:30–35.
Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R, et al. A selective referral to high volume hospitals: Estimating potential avoidable deaths. JAMA2000;283:1159–1166.
Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR. How is volume related to quality in health care? A systematic review of the research literature. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, 2000.
Birkmeyer JD, Lucas FL, Wennberg DE. Potential benefits of regionalizing major surgery in Medicare patients. Eff Clin Pract 1999;2:277–283.
Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson EVA, Birkmeyer CM. Volume standards for high-risk surgical procedures: Potential benefits of the Leapfrog initiative. Surgery 2001;130:415–422.
Siminovic M, To T, Theriault M, Langer B. Relation between hospital surgical volume and outcome for pancreatic resection for neoplasm in a publicly funded health care system. Can Med Assoc J 1999;160:643–648.
Sosa JA, Bowman HM, Gordon TA, et al. Importance of hospital volume in the overall management of pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg 1998;228(3):429–438.
Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EVA, et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1128–1137.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Dixon, E., Vollmer, C.M., Bathe, O. et al. Training, practice, and referral patterns in hepatobiliary and pancreatic surgery: Survey of general surgeons. J Gastrointest Surg 9, 109–114 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2004.03.008
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gassur.2004.03.008