The effect of centralization of caseload for primary brain tumor surgeries: Trends from 2001-2007
ABSTRACT Improved patient outcomes have been associated with high-caseload hospitals for a multitude of conditions. This study analyzed adult patients undergoing surgical resection or biopsy of primary brain tumors. The aim of this study is two-fold: (1) to evaluate whether the trend towards centralization of primary brain tumor care in the US has continued during the period of between 2001 and 2007, and (2) to analyze volume-outcome effects.
Surgical volume trends of adults undergoing resection/biopsy of primary supratentorial brain tumors were analyzed using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample. High- and low-caseload hospitals were defined as those performing in the highest and lowest quintile of procedures, respectively. Length of stay (LOS), mortality and discharge disposition were the main outcomes of interest.
NIS estimated 124,171 patients underwent resection/biopsy of primary supratentorial brain tumors between 2001 and 2007 in the US. The average number of annual resections in the highest 2 % and lowest 25 % caseload hospitals were 322 and 12 cases, respectively. Surgeries in high-caseload hospitals increased by 137 %, while those in low-caseload centers declined by 16.0 %. Overall, mortality decreased 35 %, with a reduction of 45 % in high- (from 2.2 % to 1.2 %) and 19 % in low- (from 3.2 % to 2.6 %) caseload hospitals. High-caseload centers had lower LOS than hospitals with lower caseload centers (6.4 vs. 8.0 days, p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that patients treated in low-volume hospitals had an increased risk of death (OR 1.8, CI: 1.2-2.7, p = 0.006) and adverse discharge (OR 1.4, CI: 1.1-1.7, p = 0.01).
Neurosurgical caseload at the nation's high volume craniotomy centers has continued to rise disproportionately, while low-caseload centers have seen a decrease in overall surgical volume. Over the time period between 2001 and 2007 there was a trend towards improved in-hospital mortality, LOS and discharge disposition for all hospitals; however, the trend is convincingly favorable for high-caseload hospitals.
- Acta Neurochirurgica 10/2012; 155(1). DOI:10.1007/s00701-012-1533-8 · 1.77 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Object: Early work on deep brain stimulation (DBS) surgery, when procedures were mostly carried out in a small number of high-volume centers, demonstrated a relationship between surgical volume and procedural safety. However, over the past decade, DBS has become more widely available in the community rather than solely at academic medical centers. The authors examined the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) to study the safety of DBS surgery for Parkinson disease (PD) in association with this change in practice patterns. Methods: The NIS is a stratified sample of 20% of all patient discharges from nonfederal hospitals in the United States. The authors identified patients with a primary diagnosis of PD (332.0) and a primary procedure code for implantation/replacement of intracranial neurostimulator leads (02.93) who underwent surgery between 2002 and 2009. They analyzed outcomes using univariate and hierarchical, logistic regression analyses. Results: The total number of DBS cases remained stable from 2002 through 2009. Despite older and sicker patients undergoing DBS, procedural safety (rates of non-home discharges, complications) remained stable. Patients at low-volume hospitals were virtually indistinguishable from those at high-volume hospitals, except that patients at low-volume hospitals had slightly higher comorbidity scores (0.90 vs 0.75, p < 0.01). Complications, non-home discharges, length of hospital stay, and mortality rates did not significantly differ between low- and high-volume hospitals when accounting for hospital-related variables (caseload, teaching status, location). Conclusions: Prior investigations have demonstrated a robust volume-outcome relationship for a variety of surgical procedures. However, the present study supports safety of DBS at smaller-volume centers. Prospective studies are required to determine whether low-volume centers and higher-volume centers have similar DBS efficacy, a critical factor in determining whether DBS is comparable between centers.Journal of Neurosurgery 09/2013; 119(6). DOI:10.3171/2013.8.JNS13475 · 3.74 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Our purpose was to determine the incidence and risk factors associated with in-hospital venous thromboembolism (VTE) in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH). The Nationwide Inpatient Sample database was queried from 2002 to 2010 for hospital admissions for subarachnoid hemorrhage or intracerebral hemorrhage and either aneurysm clipping or coiling. Exclusion criteria were age <18, arteriovenous malformation/fistula diagnosis or repair, or radiosurgery. Primary outcome was VTE (deep vein thrombosis [DVT] or pulmonary embolus [PE]). Multivariate logistic regression was used to assess association between risk factors and VTE. Secondary outcomes were in-hospital mortality, discharge disposition, length of stay and hospital charges. A total of 15,968 hospital admissions were included. Overall rates of VTE (DVT or PE), DVT, and PE were 4.4%, 3.5%, and 1.2%, respectively. On multivariate analysis, the following factors were associated with increased VTE risk: increasing age, black race, male sex, teaching hospital, congestive heart failure, coagulopathy, neurologic disorders, paralysis, fluid and electrolyte disorders, obesity, and weight loss. Patients that underwent clipping versus coiling had similar VTE rates. VTE was associated with pulmonary/cardiac complication (odds ratio [OR] 2.8), infectious complication (OR 2.8), ventriculostomy (OR 1.8), and vasospasm (OR 1.3). Patients with VTE experienced increased non-routine discharge (OR 3.3), and had nearly double the mean length of stay (p<0.001) and total inflation-adjusted hospital charges (p<0.001). To our knowledge, this is the largest study evaluating the incidence and risk factors associated with the development of VTE after aSAH. The presence of one or more of these factors may necessitate more aggressive VTE prophylaxis.Journal of Clinical Neuroscience 10/2013; 21(2). DOI:10.1016/j.jocn.2013.07.003 · 1.38 Impact Factor