Disparities in the Utilization of High-Volume Hospitals for Complex Surgery

Center for Surgical Outcomes and Quality, Department of Surgery, David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, Calif, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 35.29). 10/2006; 296(16):1973-80. DOI: 10.1001/jama.296.16.1973
Source: PubMed


Referral to high-volume hospitals has been recommended for operations with a demonstrated volume-outcome relationship. The characteristics of patients who receive care at low-volume hospitals may be different from those of patients who receive care at high-volume hospitals. These differences may limit their ability to access or receive care at a high-volume hospital.
To identify patient characteristics associated with the use of high-volume hospitals, using California's Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development patient discharge database.
Retrospective study of Californians receiving the following inpatient operations from 2000 through 2004: elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, coronary artery bypass grafting, carotid endarterectomy, esophageal cancer resection, hip fracture repair, lung cancer resection, cardiac valve replacement, coronary angioplasty, pancreatic cancer resection, and total knee replacement.
Patient race/ethnicity and insurance status in high-volume (highest 20% of patients by mean annual volume) and in low-volume (lowest 20%) hospitals.
A total of 719,608 patients received 1 of the 10 operations. Overall, nonwhites, Medicaid patients, and uninsured patients were less likely to receive care at high-volume hospitals and more likely to receive care at low-volume hospitals when controlling for other patient-level characteristics. Blacks were significantly (P<.05) less likely than whites to receive care at high-volume hospitals for 6 of the 10 operations (relative risk [RR] range, 0.40-0.72), while Asians and Hispanics were significantly less likely to receive care at high-volume hospitals for 5 (RR range, 0.60-0.91) and 9 (RR range, 0.46-0.88), respectively. Medicaid patients were significantly less likely than Medicare patients to receive care at high-volume hospitals for 7 of the operations (RR range, 0.22-0.66), while uninsured patients were less likely to be treated at high-volume hospitals for 9 (RR range, 0.20-0.81).
There are substantial disparities in the characteristics of patients receiving care at high-volume hospitals. The interest in selective referral to high-volume hospitals should include explicit efforts to identify the patient and system factors required to reduce current inequities regarding their use.

Full-text preview

Available from:
  • Source
    • "Patient-related difference is important in the volume-outcome relationship study. Some studies revealed the minority, older, and low SES patients are more likely to be treated at low-volume hospitals [20],[21]. And there is a negative association between SES and cancer survival rate [22],[23],[24]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The influence of different hospital and surgeon volumes on short-term survival after hepatic resection is not clearly clarified. By taking the known prognostic factors into account, the purpose of this study is to assess the combined effects of hospital and surgeon volume on short-term survival after hepatic resection. 13,159 patients who underwent hepatic resection between 2002 and 2006 were identified in the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. Data were extracted from it and short-term survivals were confirmed through 2006. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the relationship between survival and different hospital, surgeon volume and caseload combinations. High-volume surgeons in high-volume hospitals had the highest short-term survivals, following by high-volume surgeons in low-volume hospitals, low-volume surgeons in high-volume hospitals and low-volume surgeons in low-volume hospitals. Based on Cox proportional hazard models, although high-volume hospitals and surgeons both showed significant lower risks of short-term mortality at hospital and surgeon level analysis, after combining hospital and surgeon volume into account, high-volume surgeons in high-volume hospitals had significantly better outcomes; the hazard ratio of other three caseload combinations ranging from 1.66 to 2.08 (p<0.001) in 3-month mortality, and 1.28 to 1.58 (p<0.01) in 1-year mortality. The combined effects of hospital and surgeon volume influenced the short-term survival after hepatic resection largely. After adjusting for the prognostic factors in the case mix, high-volume surgeons in high-volume hospitals had better short-term survivals. Centralization of hepatic resection to few surgeons and hospitals might improve patients' prognosis.
    Full-text · Article · Jan 2014 · PLoS ONE
  • Source
    • "Shower stalls in which we have to stand sideways (baths are rarely an option); towels that won't fasten around our waists or chests; disproportionately expensive or ill-fitting jewelry, belts, shoes, and clothing; narrow doorways, hallways, aisles, and bathrooms; too-tiny and/or molded plastic seats in buses and on subway trains; narrow, flimsy, or armed office, lawn, theater, airplane, restaurant, and dining room seating; weight limits on exercise equipment; hospital gowns, blood pressure cuffs, MRIs, life jackets, seatbelts, and other health or safety devices that simply don't fit: all are constant reminders that fat persons don't fit, that our most basic needs, desires, and safety therefore matter less. For example, when I interviewed her on the telephone, Kyra, a White, 22-year-old woman, got quite heated when discussing a study she had recently read reporting that fat women were less likely to receive treatment for physical injuries, even cancer, because the equipment to treat us is often difficult to come by, more expensive , or requires expertise that many doctors don't have (Griggs et al., 2005; Liu, et al., 2006; Szwarc, 2007; Schwartz, et al., 2003; Wee et al., 2000). 'It's hard not to think they don't want us all to die,' she seethed. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Traditional narratives about fat experiences often exclude tangible, lived experiences in favor of examining fatness as a social and interpersonal symbol. In order to expand considerations of what it means to literally be fat, I use information from interviews, personal journals, and ethnographic research to explore how fat persons experience and navigate their daily, spatial worlds. Key to my analysis is an exploration of the concept of spatial discrimination, or experiencing the physical and emotional effects of living in a world designed with smaller bodies in mind. I propose spatial discrimination as a form of microaggression, a type of discrimination that implicitly, and through a myriad small words and examples, derides the physicalities and identities of marginalized persons. Finally, I explore three common, social psychological methods of coping with spatial discrimination: withdrawal, invisibility, and disembodiment, all of which illustrate fat persons’ adaptations to moving through physical spaces that implicitly exclude them.
    Full-text · Article · Jul 2012 · Feminism & Psychology
  • Source
    • "Similarly, several studies demonstrate improved survival for men with metastatic testis cancer who were treated with chemotherapy at higher volume centers [18] [19] [20]. This raises concern whether minorities and lower income men have unequal access to high volume centers and the comprehensive cancer care they offer, which has been shown to be disparate for several other complex surgical procedures [21]. Second, while higher hospital volumes were associated with fewer respiratory complications when assessing volume dichotomously, RPLND volume assessed as a continuous variable was associated with fewer overall and miscellaneous medical complications, and more routine home discharges. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objectives. Retroperitoneal lymph node dissection (RPLND) outcomes for testis cancer originate mostly from single-center series. We characterized population-based utilization, costs, and outcomes and assessed whether higher volume affects outcomes. Methods and Materials. Using the US Nationwide Inpatient Sample from 2001-2008, we identified 993 RPLND and used propensity score methods to assess utilization, costs, and inpatient outcomes based on hospital surgical volume. Results. 51.6% of RPLND were performed at hospitals where there were two or fewer cases per year. RPLND was more commonly performed at large urban teaching hospitals, where men were younger, more likely to be white and earning incomes exceeding the 50th percentile (all P ≤ .05). Higher hospital volumes were associated with fewer complications and more routine home discharges (all P ≤ .047). However, higher volume hospitals had more transfusions (P = .004) and incurred $1,435 more in median costs (P < .001). Limitations include inability to adjust for tumor characteristics and absence of outpatient outcomes. Conclusions. Sociodemographic differences exist between high versus low volume RPLND hospitals. Although higher volume hospitals had more transfusions and higher costs, perhaps due to more complex cases, they experienced fewer complications. However, most RPLND are performed at hospitals where there were two or fewer cases per year.
    Full-text · Article · Apr 2012 · Advances in Urology
Show more