Article

The effect of centralization of caseload for primary brain tumor surgeries: trends from 2001-2007

Department of Neurosurgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Center for Neurosurgical Outcomes Research, Maxine Dunitz Neurosurgical Institute, 8631 W. Third Street, Suite 800E, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
Acta Neurochirurgica (Impact Factor: 1.79). 06/2012; 154(8):1343-50. DOI: 10.1007/s00701-012-1358-5
Source: PubMed

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.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
73 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The 2001 Report of the Public Inquiry into children's heart surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984-1995 stated that there must be standards for hospitals as a whole and that hospitals, which do not meet these standards, should not be able to offer services within the National Health Service (NHS). In 2013, agreed standards for pediatric neurosurgery were produced. Between 2001 and 2013 several key documents were published, which formed the background to the review that produced these standards:, the 'Safe and Sustainable' review. The process had the mission statement, 'Safe, sustainable and world class. Not ordinary, OK or just good enough.' In April 2013, the new commissioning structure of NHS England came into being. Clinical Reference Groups (reporting directly into the new structure) and pediatric neurosurgical operational delivery networks are taking the Safe and Sustainable pediatric neurosurgery standards and models of care into practice in England. Effective outcome data collection will allow us to assess whether these networks will improve equity of access for English children to world-class pediatric neurosurgical care and reduce the variation in outcomes seen at the present time.
    Pediatric Anesthesia 07/2014; 24(7):649-56. DOI:10.1111/pan.12453 · 2.44 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECT The object of this study was to examine how procedural volume and patient demographics impact complication rates and value of care in those who underwent biopsy or craniotomy for supratentorial primary brain tumors. METHODS The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study using data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) on 62,514 admissions for biopsy or resection of supratentorial primary brain tumors for the period from 2000 to 2009. The main outcome measures were in-hospital mortality, routine discharge proportion, length of hospital stay, and perioperative complications. Associations between these outcomes and hospital or surgeon case volumes were examined in logistic regression models stratified across patient characteristics to control for presentation of disease and comorbid risk factors. The authors further computed value of care, defined as the ratio of functional outcome to hospital charges. RESULTS High-case-volume surgeons and hospitals had superior outcomes. After adjusting for patient characteristics, high-volume surgeon correlated with reduced complication rates (OR 0.91, p = 0.04) and lower in-hospital mortality (OR 0.43, p < 0.0001). High-volume hospitals were associated with reduced in-hospital mortality (OR 0.76, p = 0.003), higher routine discharge proportion (OR 1.29, p < 0.0001), and lower complication rates (OR 0.93, p = 0.04). Patients treated by high-volume surgeons were less likely to experience postoperative hematoma, hydrocephalus, or wound complications. Patients treated at high-volume hospitals were less likely to experience mechanical ventilation, pulmonary complications, or infectious complications. Worse outcomes tended to occur in African American and Hispanic patients and in those without private insurance, and these demographic groups tended to underutilize high-volume providers. CONCLUSIONS A high-volume status for hospitals and surgeons correlates with superior value of care, as well as reduced in-hospital mortality and complications. These findings suggest that regionalization of care may enhance patient outcomes and improve value of care for patients with primary supratentorial brain tumors.
    Journal of Neurosurgery 11/2014; 122(2):1-17. DOI:10.3171/2014.9.JNS131648 · 3.23 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Object Although heterogeneity exists in patient outcomes following subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) across different centers and countries, it is unclear which factors contribute to such disparities. In this study, the authors performed a post hoc analysis of a large international database to evaluate the association between a country's socioeconomic indicators and patient outcome following aneurysmal SAH. Methods An analysis was performed on a database of 3552 patients enrolled in studies of tirilazad mesylate for aneurysmal SAH from 1991 to 1997, which included 162 neurosurgical centers in North and Central America, Australia, Europe, and Africa. Two primary outcomes were assessed at 3 months after SAH: mortality and Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score. The association between these outcomes, nation-level socioeconomic indicators (percapita gross domestic product [GDP], population-to-neurosurgeon ratio, and health care funding model), and patientlevel covariates were assessed using a hierarchical mixed-effects logistic regression analysis. Results Multiple previously identified patient-level covariates were significantly associated with increased mortality and worse neurological outcome, including age, intraventricular hemorrhage, and initial neurological grade. Among national-level covariates, higher per-capita GDP (p < 0.05) was associated with both reduced mortality and improved neurological outcome. A higher population-to-neurosurgeon ratio (p < 0.01), as well as fewer neurosurgical centers per population (p < 0.001), was also associated with better neurological outcome (p < 0.01). Health care funding model was not a significant predictor of either primary outcome. Conclusions Higher per-capita gross GDP and population-to-neurosurgeon ratio were associated with improved outcome after aneurysmal SAH. The former result may speak to the availability of resources, while the latter may be a reflection of better outcomes with centralized care. Although patient clinical and radiographic phenotypes remain the primary predictors of outcome, this study shows that national socioeconomic disparities also explain heterogeneity in outcomes following SAH.
    Journal of Neurosurgery 08/2014; 121(5):1-9. DOI:10.3171/2014.7.JNS132141 · 3.23 Impact Factor