Differences in patients, surgical complexity, and outcomes after cancer surgery at national cancer institute-designated cancer centers compared to other hospitals

Medical Care

Volumn 51, Issue 7, 2013, Pages 606-613

  Merkow, Ryan P ^a,b,c,d   Bentrem, David J ^b,c,e   Chung, Jeanette W ^b,c   Paruch, Jennifer L ^a,d   Ko, Clifford Y ^a,f,g   Bilimoria, Karl Y ^a,b,c  

^a AMERICAN COLLEGE OF SURGEONS   (United States)

^b National Surgical Quality Improvement Program   (United States)

^c NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

^e JESSE BROWN VA MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g VA GREATER LOS ANGELES HEALTHCARE SYSTEM   (United States)

Author keywords

ACS NSQIP; American College of Surgeons; cancer; National Cancer Institute Cancer Center; oncology; outcomes; quality; risk adjustment; surgery; surgical oncology

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CANCER CENTER; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER SURGERY; COLORECTAL SURGERY; COMORBIDITY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HOSPITAL CARE; HOSPITALIZATION; HUMAN; LENGTH OF STAY; LIVER RESECTION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MORBIDITY; NATIONAL HEALTH ORGANIZATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PANCREAS SURGERY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL INFECTION; SURGICAL MORTALITY; SURGICAL PATIENT; VASCULAR SURGERY;

AGED; CANCER CARE FACILITIES; CONFIDENCE INTERVALS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE (U.S.); NEOPLASMS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, OPERATIVE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84879884247     PISSN: 00257079     EISSN: 15371948     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3182928f44     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Begg CB, Cramer LD, Hoskins WJ, et al. Impact of hospital volume on operative mortality for major cancer surgery. JAMA. 1998;280:1747-1751 (Pubitemid 28536874)
2. Killeen SD, O'Sullivan MJ, Coffey JC, et al. Provider volume and outcomes for oncological procedures. Br J Surg 2005;92:389-402 (Pubitemid 40523899)
3. Birkmeyer JD, Sun Y, Wong SL, et al. Hospital volume and late survival after cancer surgery. Ann Surg 2007;245:777-783 (Pubitemid 46684108)
4. Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Feinglass JM, et al. Directing surgical quality improvement initiatives: comparison of perioperative mortality and long-Term survival for cancer surgery. J Clin Oncol 2008;26: 4626-4633
5. Hewitt ME, Simone JV, National Cancer Policy Board (US)Institute of Medicine (US)National Research Council (US)Commission on Life Sciences. Ensuring Quality Cancer Care. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1999
6. Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The Department of Veterans Affairs' NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, riskadjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann Surg. 1998;228:491-507 (Pubitemid 30194393)
7. The Leapfrog Group. Available at: http://www.leapfroggroup.org/. Accessed June 15, 2012
8. Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R, et al. Selective referral to highvolume hospitals: estimating potentially avoidable deaths. JAMA. 2000:1159-1166 (Pubitemid 30126604)
9. Hollenbeck BK, Dunn RL, Miller DC, et al. Volume-based referral for cancer surgery: informing the debate. J Clin Oncol 2007;25: 91-96 (Pubitemid 350010639)
10. Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med 1979;301:1364-1369 (Pubitemid 10170739)
11. National Quality Forum: Performance Measurement Coordination Strategy for PPS-Exempt Cancer Hospitals. Final Report, June, 2012. Available at: http://www.nqf.org. Accessed April 4, 2013
12. Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Talamonti MS, et al. Risk-based selective referral for cancer surgery: a potential strategy to improve perioperative outcomes. Ann Surg. 2010;251:708-716
13. Paulson EC, Mitra N, Sonnad S, et al. National Cancer Institute designation predicts improved outcomes in colorectal cancer surgery. Ann Surg 2008;248:675-686
14. Birkmeyer NJ, Goodney PP, Stukel TA, et al. Do cancer centers designated by the National Cancer Institute have better surgical outcomes? Cancer. 2005;103:435-441
15. Ingraham AM, Richards KE, Hall BL, et al. Quality improvement in surgery: the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program approach. Adv Surg. 2010;44:251-267
16. Khuri SF, Henderson WG, Daley J, et al. Successful implementation of the Department of Veterans Affairs' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program in the private sector: the Patient Safety in Surgery study. Ann Surg. 2008;248:329-336
17. Khuri SF, Henderson WG, Daley J, et al. The patient safety in surgery study: background, study design, and patient populations. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1089-1102 (Pubitemid 46819102)
18. Daley J, Khuri SF, Henderson W, et al. Risk adjustment of the postoperative morbidity rate for the comparative assessment of the quality of surgical care: results of the National Veterans Affairs Surgical Risk Study. J Am Coll Surg. 1997;185:328-340 (Pubitemid 27419190)
19. Raval MV, Cohen ME, Ingraham AM, et al. Improving American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program risk adjustment: incorporation of a novel procedure risk score. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;211:715-723
20. Shiloach M, Frencher SK Jr, Steeger JE, et al. Toward robust information: data quality and inter-rater reliability in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. J Am Coll Surg. 2010;210:6-16
21. Department of Health and Human Services. The International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revised. Clinical Modification: ICD-9 CM. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office; 1998.
22. CPT 2011. Current Procedural Terminology. Chicago: American Medical Association; 2011.
23. Silber JH, Williams SV, Krakauer H, et al. Hospital and patient characteristics associated with death after surgery. A study of adverse occurrence and failure to rescue. Med Care. 1992;30:615-629
24. Cohen ME, Bilimoria KY, Ko CY, et al. Variability in length of stay after colorectal surgery: assessment of 182 hospitals in the national surgical quality improvement program. Ann Surg. 2009;250:901-907
25. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied Logistic Regression. 2nd ed. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc.; 2000.
26. Merkow RP, Hall BL, Cohen ME, et al. Relevance of the c-statistic when evaluating risk-adjustment models in surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214:822-830
27. Moore L, Hanley JA, Turgeon AF, et al. Evaluating the performance of trauma centers: hierarchical modeling should be used. J Trauma. 2010;69:1132-1137
28. Greenland S. Principles of multilevel modelling. Int J Epidemiol. 2000;29:158-167 (Pubitemid 30119722)
29. Shahian DM, Normand SL, Torchiana DF, et al. Cardiac surgery report cards: comprehensive review and statistical critique. Ann Thorac Surg. 2001;72:2155-2168 (Pubitemid 34002965)
30. SAS/STAT(R) 9.3 User's Guide. The Power Procedure. Available at: http://support.sas.com/documentation/cdl/en/statug/63962/HTML/default/viewer. htm. Accessed February 5, 2013.
31. Dimick JB, Ghaferi AA, Osborne NH, et al. Reliability adjustment for reporting hospital outcomes with surgery. Ann Surg. 2012;255:703-707
32. Merkow RP, Bilimoria KY. Currently available quality improvement initiatives in surgical oncology. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2012;21: 367-375. vii
33. Spinks TE, Walters R, Feeley TW, et al. Improving cancer care through public reporting of meaningful quality measures. Health Aff (Millwood). 2011;30:664-672
34. Rowell KS, Turrentine FE, Hutter MM, et al. Use of national surgical quality improvement program data as a catalyst for quality improvement. J Am Coll Surg. 2007;204:1293-1300 (Pubitemid 46819101)
35. American College of Surgeons. National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: Semiannual Report July 2012. Chicago: American College of Surgeons; 2012.