The impact of the 'hub and spoke' model of care for lung cancer and equitable access to surgery

Thorax

Volumn 70, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 146-151

  Khakwani, Aamir ^a   Rich, Anna L ^b   Powell, Helen A ^a   Tata, Laila J ^a   Stanley, Rosamund A ^c   Baldwin, David R ^b   Duffy, John P ^b   Hubbard, Richard B ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b NOTTINGHAM UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS NHS TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^c ROYAL COLLEGE OF PHYSICIANS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE ACCESS; HEALTH CARE DISPARITY; HEALTH CARE FACILITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; LUNG RESECTION; LUNG SURGERY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NON SMALL CELL LUNG CANCER; POPULATION DENSITY; VERY ELDERLY; AGE; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HOSPITAL; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MIDDLE AGED; NONBIOLOGICAL MODEL; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PATHOLOGY; PATIENT ACUITY; RESIDENTIAL CARE; SEX DIFFERENCE; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; THORAX SURGERY; UNITED KINGDOM;

AGE FACTORS; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CARCINOMA, NON-SMALL-CELL LUNG; CATCHMENT AREA (HEALTH); CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDIES; ENGLAND; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HOSPITALS, SPECIAL; HUMANS; LUNG NEOPLASMS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MODELS, ORGANIZATIONAL; PATIENT ACUITY; PNEUMONECTOMY; SEX FACTORS; THORACIC SURGERY;

EID: 84921295148     PISSN: 00406376     EISSN: 14683296     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2014-205841     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Luchtenborg M, Riaz SP, Coupland VH, et al. High procedure volume is strongly associated with improved survival after lung cancer surgery. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3141-6.
2. Riaz SP, Linklater KM, Page R, et al. Recent trends in resection rates among non-small cell lung cancer patients in England. Thorax 2012;67:811-14.
3. Rich AL, Tata LJ, Free CM, et al. Inequalities in outcomes for non-small cell lung cancer: the influence of clinical characteristics and features of the local lung cancer service. Thorax 2011;66:1078-84.
4. Khakwani A, Rich AL, Powell HA, et al. Lung cancer survival in England: trends in non-small-cell lung cancer survival over the duration of the National Lung Cancer Audit. Br J Cancer 2013;109:2058-65.
5. Coleman MP, Forman D, Bryant H, et al. Cancer survival in Australia, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the UK, 1995-2007 (the International Cancer Benchmarking Partnership): an analysis of population-based cancer registry data. Lancet 2011;377:127-38.
6. Holmberg L, Sandin F, Bray F, et al. National comparisons of lung cancer survival in England, Norway and Sweden 2001-2004: differences occur early in follow-up. Thorax 2010;65:436-41.
7. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Lung cancer: the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer. [Clinical guideline] April 2011; http://guidance.nice.org.uk/CG121
8. Rich AL, Tata LJ, Stanley RA, et al. Lung cancer in England: information from the National Lung Cancer Audit (LUCADA). Lung Cancer 2011;72:16-22.
9. Health and Social Care Information Centre. National Lung Cancer Audit 2010. 2010.
10. Health and Social Care Information Centre. National Lung Cancer Audit Report 2011. 2011. http://www.hqip.org.uk/assets/NCAPOP-Library/Lung-Cancer-NHS-IC-AUDIT-2011.pdf
11. Powell HA, Tata LJ, Baldwin DR, et al. Early mortality after surgical resection for lung cancer: an analysis of the English National Lung cancer audit. Thorax 2013;68:826-34.
12. Riaz SP, Luchtenborg M, Jack RH, et al. Variation in surgical resection for lung cancer in relation to survival: population-based study in England 2004-2006. Eur J Cancer 2012;48:54-60.
13. Woolhouse I. Variation in lung cancer outcomes in the UK and Europe. Clin Med 2011;11:110-11.
14. Campbell SE, Campbell MK, Grimshaw JM, et al. A systematic review of discharge coding accuracy. J Public Health Med 2001;23:205-11.
15. Powell H, Tata L, Stanley R, et al. P13Identifying patients who had surgical resection for non-small cell lung cancer using large datasets. Thorax 2013;68(Suppl 3):A80.
16. Lau KKW, Rathinam S, Waller DA, et al. The effects of increased provision of thoracic surgical specialists on the variation in lung cancer resection rate in England. J Thoracic Oncol 2013;8:68-72.
17. von Meyenfeldt EM, Gooiker GA, van Gijn W, et al. The relationship between volume or surgeon specialty and outcome in the surgical treatment of lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Thorac Oncol 2012;7:1170-8.
18. Treasure T, Utley M, Bailey A. Assessment of whether in-hospital mortality for lobectomy is a useful standard for the quality of lung cancer surgery: retrospective study. BMJ 2003;327:73.
19. Strand TE, Rostad H, Moller B, et al. Survival after resection for primary lung cancer: a population based study of 3211 resected patients. Thorax 2006;61:710-15.
20. Jack RH, Gulliford MC, Ferguson J, et al. Geographical inequalities in lung cancer management and survival in South East England: evidence of variation in access to oncology services? [Erratum appears in Br J Cancer. 2004 Nov 15;91(10):1852]. Br J Cancer 2003;88:1025-31.
21. Khakwani A, Rich AL, Tata LJ, et al. The pathological confirmation rate of lung cancer in England using the NLCA database. Lung Cancer 2013;79:125-31.
22. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EVA, et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med 2002;346:1128-37.
23. Boudourakis LD, Wang TS, Roman SA, et al. Evolution of the surgeon-volume, patient-outcome relationship.[Erratum appears in Ann Surg. 2009 Dec;250(6):1046]. Ann Surg 2009;250:159-65.
24. Kozower BD, Stukenborg GJ. The relationship between hospital lung cancer resection volume and patient mortality risk. Ann Surg 2011;254:1032-7.