International comparison of minimum volume standards for hospitals

Surgical radioguidance with beta-emitting radionuclides; challenges and possibilities: A position paper by the EANM

Radioguidance that makes use of β-emitting radionuclides is gaining in popularity and could have potential to strengthen the range of existing radioguidance techniques. While there is a strong tendency to develop new PET radiotracers, due to favorable imaging characteristics and the success of theranostics research, there are practical challenges that need to be overcome when considering use of β-emitters for surgical radioguidance. In this position paper, the EANM identifies the possibilities and challenges that relate to the successful implementation of β-emitters in surgical guidance, covering aspects related to instrumentation, radiation protection, and modes of implementation.

Declining utilization of urodynamic studies in urological care in Germany: time to say goodbye?

INTRODUCTION

The number of urodynamic studies (UDS) has been declining steadily in recent decades, yet the reasons behind this trend remain poorly understood. This study aims to investigate the structural aspects of UDS in urology and explore the factors contributing to this decline.

MATERIAL & METHODS

We surveyed all urological departments performing UDS as well as a representative sample of private practices in Germany in 2023. We examined structural situation, waiting times, capacities and limitations of UDS. All invasive urodynamic examinations were defined as UDS.

RESULTS

In 2019, 259/474 (55%) urological departments in Germany performed UDS. 206/259 (80%) urological departments responded to the survey. 163/200 (82%) urological departments stated that their capacities were exhausted, a main reason being lack of medical and nursing staff. 54.8% urological departments performed more than 50% of their UDS for referring physicians. Urological departments with a low number of UDS/year (≤ 100) showed a shorter waiting time (up to 4 weeks: 49% vs. 30%; p = 0.01), reduced UDS capacities (55% vs. 12%; p < 0.001) and these capacities were often not fully utilized (25% vs. 9%; p = 0.007). 122/280 (44%) office urologists responded to the survey. 18/122 (15%) office urologists performed UDS. Main reasons for not offering UDS were lack of personnel and low reimbursement.

CONCLUSION

In German urological departments, UDS capacities are consistently fully utilized, primarily due to staffing shortages. This trend towards centralization prompts questions about the role of UDS in urologists' training.

Care fragmentation in hepatopancreatic surgery and postoperative outcomes

BACKGROUND

Practice fragmentation in surgery may be associated with poor quality of care. We sought to define the association between fragmented practice and outcomes in hepatopancreatic surgery relative to surgeon volume and sex.

METHODS

Medicare beneficiaries who underwent hepatopancreatic surgery between 2016 and 2021 were identified. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine provider sex-based differences in the rate of fragmented practice relative to the achievement of a textbook outcome and health care expenditures after adjusting for procedure-specific case volume.

RESULTS

Among 37,416 patients, almost one-half were female (n = 18,333, 49.0%) with the majority treated by male surgeons (n = 33,697, 90.8%). Female surgeons were more likely to have a greater rate of fragmented practice (females: n = 242, 84.9% vs males: n = 1,487, 78.4%, P = .003; odds ratio 2.66, 95% confidence interval 2.33-3.03, P < .001). Patients treated by high rate of fragmented practice surgeons had increased odds of postoperative complications (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.54), extended length-of-stay (odds ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.38-1.68), 90-day-mortality (odds ratio 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.28-1.72), and lower odds of achieving a textbook outcome (odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.71-0.83). This association persisted independent of surgeon-specific volume (textbook outcome, high vs low rate of fragmented practice: high-volume surgeon, odds ratio 0.53, 95% confidence interval 0.31-0.91, P = .021 vs. low-volume surgeon, odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.82, P < .001). Among patients treated by male surgeons, a high rate of fragmented practice was associated with reduced odds of achieving a textbook outcome (male surgeons: odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.70-0.82, P < .001; female surgeons: odds ratio 0.81, 95% confidence interval 0.63-1.05, P = .110). Treatment by surgeons with higher fragmented practice was associated with higher expenditures (index expenditure: percentage difference 9.87, 95% confidence interval, 7.42-12.36; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

A high rate of fragmented practice adversely affected postoperative outcomes and healthcare expenditures even among high-volume surgeons with the impact varying based on surgeon sex.

Systemic anticancer treatment in the Netherlands: Few hospitals treat many patients, many hospitals treat few patients

INTRODUCTION

The correlation between patient volume and clinical outcomes is well known for various oncological treatments, especially in the surgical field. The current level of centralisation of systemic treatment of (hemato-)oncology indications in Dutch hospitals is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to gain insight in patient volumes per hospital of patients treated with systemic anticancer treatment in the Netherlands.

METHODS

National claims data (Vektis) of all 73 Dutch hospitals that provide systemic anticancer medication in the Netherlands for the time period 2019 were used. The distribution of volumes of patients treated with anticancer medication for 38 different haematological or oncological indications was analysed. Hospitals were categorized into academic/specialised, general, and top clinical. Two volume cut off points (10 and 30 patients) were used to identify hospitals treating relatively few patients with anticancer medication. Four indications were investigated in more detail.

RESULTS

A wide distribution in patient volumes within hospitals was observed. Top clinical hospitals generally treated the most patients per hospital, followed by general and academic/specialised oncology hospitals. The volume cut off points showed that in 19 indications (50%) the majority (>50%) of all hospitals treated less than 10 patients and in 25 indications (66%) the majority of all hospitals treated less than 30 patients with anticancer medication. Four case studies demonstrated that relatively few hospitals treat many patients while many hospitals treat few patients with anticancer medication.

CONCLUSION

In the majority of oncology indications, a large proportion of Dutch hospitals treat small numbers of unique patients with anticancer medication. The high level of fragmentation gives ground for further exploration and discussion on how the organisation of care can support optimization of the efficiency and quality of care. Professional groups, policy makers, patients, and healthcare insurers should consider per indication whether centralisation is warranted.

Minimum Volume Standards: An Incentive To Perform More Radical Cystectomies?

Background

Minimum volume standards (MVS) for hospitals and/or surgeons remain a subject of debate. Opponents of MVS emphasize the possible negative effects of centralization, such as an unwanted incentive to perform surgery.

Objective

To evaluate whether the introduction of MVS for radical cystectomy (RC) in the Netherlands resulted in more RCs outside guideline-recommended indications.

Design setting and participants

All RCs performed for bladder cancer in the Netherlands between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2017 were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. During this period, two MVS were sequentially implemented for RC. RCs in intermediate-volume hospitals (hospitals that approximated the MVS) were compared with RCs in high-volume hospitals (hospitals exceeding the MVS by ≥5 RCs/yr) in a period before and a period after implementation of each of the two MVS.

Outcomes measurements and statistical analysis

Descriptive analyses were performed to evaluate whether hospitals performed more RCs outside the recommended indication (cT2-4a N0 M0) and whether an increase in the number of RCs towards the end of the year could be observed.

Results and limitations

After MVS implementation, no clear shift towards disease stages outside the recommended indication for RC was observed in comparison to the period before the MVS. Results for high-volume and intermediate-volume hospitals were similar. In addition, no increase in RCs towards the end of the year was evident.

Conclusions

We did not find evidence indicating an unwanted incentive to perform more RCs as a result of MVS in the Netherlands. Our results further strengthen the case for MVS implementation.

Patient summary

We evaluated whether criteria for the minimum number of radical cystectomies (surgical removal of the bladder) that hospitals have to perform caused urologists to perform more of these operations than necessary in order to meet the minimum level. We found no evidence that minimum criteria led to such an unwanted incentive.

Protocol for the development of a core outcome set for studies on centralisation of healthcare services

INTRODUCTION

Centralisation defined as the reorganisation of healthcare services into fewer specialised units serving a higher volume of patients is a potential measure for healthcare reforms aiming at reducing costs while improving quality. Research on centralisation of healthcare services is thus essential to inform decision-makers. However, so far studies on centralisation report a variability of outcomes, often neglecting outcomes at the health system level. Therefore, this study aims at developing a core outcome set (COS) for studies on centralisation of hospital procedures, which is intended for use in observational as well as in experimental studies.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We propose a five-stage study design: (1) systematic review, (2) focus group, (3) interview studies, (4) online survey, (5) Delphi survey. The study will be conducted from March 2022 to November 2023. First, an initial list of outcomes will be identified through a systematic review on reported outcomes in studies on minimum volume regulations. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, CINHAL, EconLIT, PDQ-Evidence for Informed Health Policymaking, Health Systems Evidence, Open Grey and also trial registries. This will be supplemented with relevant outcomes from published studies on centralisation of hospital procedures. Second, we will conduct a focus group with representatives of patient advocacy groups for which minimum volume regulations are currently in effect in Germany or are likely to come into effect to identify outcomes important to patients. Furthermore, two interview studies, one with representatives of the German medical societies and one with representatives of statutory health insurance funds, as well as an online survey with health services researchers will be conducted. In our analyses of the suggested outcomes, we will largely follow the categorisation scheme developed by the Cochrane EPOC group. Finally, a two-round online Delphi survey with all stakeholder groups using predefined score criteria for consensus will be employed to first prioritise outcomes and then agree on the final COS.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Research Ethics Committee at the Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane (MHB). The final COS will be disseminated to all stakeholders involved and through peer-reviewed publications and conferences.

The effect of minimum volume standards in hospitals (MIVOS) - protocol of a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The volume-outcome relationship, i.e., higher hospital volume results in better health outcomes, has been established for different surgical procedures as well as for certain nonsurgical medical interventions. Accordingly, many countries such as Germany, the USA, Canada, the UK, and Switzerland have established minimum volume standards. To date, there is a lack of systematically summarized evidence regarding the effects of such regulations.

METHODS

To be included in the review, studies must measure any effects connected to minimum volume standards. Outcomes of interest include the following: (1) patient-related outcomes, (2) process-related outcomes, and (3) health system-related outcomes. We will include (cluster) randomized controlled trials ([C]RCTs), non-randomized controlled trials (nRCTs), controlled before-after studies (CBAs), and interrupted time-series studies (ITSs). We will apply no restrictions regarding language, publication date, and publication status. We will search MEDLINE (via PubMed), Embase (via Embase), CENTRAL (via Cochrane Library), CINHAL (via EBSCO), EconLit (via EBSCO), PDQ evidence for informed health policymaking, health systems evidence, OpenGrey, and also trial registries for relevant studies. We will further search manually for additional studies by cross-checking the reference lists of all included primary studies as well as cross-checking the reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. To evaluate the risk of bias, we will use the ROBINS-I and RoB 2 risk-of-bias tools for the corresponding study designs. For data synthesis and statistical analyses, we will follow the guidance published by the EPOC Cochrane group (Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC), EPOC Resources for review authors, 2019).

DISCUSSION

This systematic review focuses on minimum volume standards and the outcomes used to measure their effects. It is designed to provide thorough and encompassing evidence-based information on this topic. Thus, it will inform decision-makers and policymakers with respect to the effects of minimum volume standards and inform further studies in regard to research gaps.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022318883.

Relationship between volume and outcome for gastroschisis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Newborns with gastroschisis need surgery to reduce intestines into the abdominal cavity and to close the abdominal wall. Due to an existing volume-outcome relationship for other high-risk, low-volume procedures, we aimed at examining the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for gastroschisis.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature search in Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, CINAHL and Biosis Previews in June 2021 and searched for additional literature. We included (cluster-) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and prospective or retrospective cohort studies analyzing the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and mortality, morbidity or quality of life. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using ROBINS-I and performed a systematic synthesis without meta-analysis and used GRADE for assessing the certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

We included 12 cohort studies on hospital volume. Higher hospital volume may reduce in-hospital mortality of neonates with gastroschisis, while the evidence is very uncertain for other outcomes. Findings are based on a low certainty of the evidence for in-hospital mortality and a very low certainty of the evidence for all other analyzed outcomes, mainly due to risk of bias and imprecision. We did not identify any study on surgeon volume.

CONCLUSION

The evidence suggests that higher hospital volume reduces in-hospital mortality of newborns with gastroschisis. However, the magnitude of this effect seems to be heterogeneous and results should be interpreted with caution. There is no evidence on the relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes.

Defining minimum volume thresholds to increase quality of care: a new patient-oriented approach using mixed integer programming

A positive relationship between treatment volume and outcome quality has been demonstrated in the literature and is thus evident for a variety of procedures. Consequently, policy makers have tried to translate this so-called volume-outcome relationship into minimum volume regulation (MVR) to increase the quality of care-yet with limited success. Until today, the effect of strict MVR application remains unclear as outcome quality gains cannot be estimated adequately and restrictions to application such as patient travel time and utilization of remaining hospital capacity are not considered sufficiently. Accordingly, when defining MVR, its effectiveness cannot be assessed. Thus, we developed a mixed integer programming model to define minimum volume thresholds balancing utility in terms of outcome quality gain and feasibility in terms of restricted patient travel time and utilization of hospital capacity. We applied our model to the German hospital sector and to four surgical procedures. Results showed that effective MVR needs a minimum volume threshold of 125 treatments for cholecystectomy, of 45 and 25 treatments for colon and rectum resection, respectively, of 32 treatments for radical prostatectomy and of 60 treatments for total knee arthroplasty. Depending on procedure type and incidence as well as the procedure's complication rate, outcome quality gain ranged between 287 (radical prostatectomy) and 977 (colon resection) avoidable complications (11.7% and 11.9% of all complications). Ultimately, policy makers can use our model to leverage MVR's intended benefit: concentrating treatment delivery to improve the quality of care.

Minimum surgical volume to ensure 5-year survival probability for six cancer sites in Japan

BACKGROUND

In Japan, the government designates hospitals specialized in cancer care, requiring them to perform 400 surgeries annually without requiring surgical volume per cancer site. This study aimed to estimate the site-specific minimum surgical volume per year based on its associations with 5-year survival probability.

METHODS

The data of 64,402 patients who had undergone surgery for six types of cancers (including esophageal, stomach, colorectal, pancreatic, lung, and breast cancers) at designated cancer care hospitals in Osaka between 2007 and 2011 were analyzed. The hospitals were categorized by the average annual surgical volume per cancer type (e.g., 0-4, 5-9, 10-14…). We estimated the adjusted 5-year survival probability per surgical volume category using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression. Furthermore, we identified inflection points for the trend of adjusted survival probability per increase of five surgical volumes using the joinpoint regression model and considered them as the suggested minimum surgical volume.

RESULTS

The estimated minimum surgical volumes were 35-39, 20-25, 25-29, 10-14, 10-14, and 25-29 for esophageal, stomach, colorectal, pancreatic, lung, and breast cancers, respectively. The percentage change in the adjusted 5-year survival probability per increase of five surgical volumes before and after the suggested surgical volume were +2.23 and +0.39 for the esophagus, +9.68 and +0.34 for the stomach, +8.11 and +0.05 for the colorectum, +3.82 and +0.87 for the pancreas, +9.46 and +0.23 for the lung, and +1.27 and +0.03 for the breast.

CONCLUSIONS

The suggested surgical volume based on the association with survival probability varies with cancer sites, some of which are close to the existing surgical volume standards used in Japan. These evidence-based minimum surgical volumes may help improve the quality of cancer surgeries.

Centralisation of surgery for complex cancer diseases: A scoping review of the evidence base on pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Centralisation of cancer surgery is a commonly applied healthcare strategy worldwide. This study aimed to detail the design of centralisation policies, to shed light on the implications of such policies in real practice and to describe the different perspectives taken to deal with difficulties that emerged, taking pancreatic cancer as an example of a complex cancer disease requiring surgery.

METHODOLOGY

A scoping review was conducted using the MEDLINE database. We systematically searched for eligible studies published between January 2000 and December 2018.

RESULTS

In the 33 included studies, centralisation of pancreatic cancer surgery was implemented through three different models: designated hospitals, definition of minimum volumes per provider, and/or recommendations included in protocols and national guidelines. The presence of highly advanced technology and infrastructures, the availability of extensive service coverage and advanced care processes based on expert multidisciplinary teams, and higher caseloads were identified as key components of centralisation policy.

CONCLUSIONS

Centralisation models for pancreatic cancer surgery showed that having expert centres where the care process is comprehensively guided is a foundational policy approach. External quality assessment and the accreditation of centres and professionals performing complex surgical procedures are levers that may positively impact the effectiveness of the measure. POLICY SUMMARY: while we found different experiences and three models of centralisation, all of them were guided by the will to positively impact on pancreatic cancer patients' access to expert care. Clinical research might be able to make progress in the coming years and perhaps contribute to reversing a critical situation of high mortality and growing incidence. However, policymakers must optimise health system responses considering current resources, as suggested by the recommendations proposed in the framework of the EU initiative Bratislava Statement for pancreatic cancer care.

Associations of hospital volume and hospital competition with short-term, middle-term and long-term patient outcomes after breast cancer surgery: a retrospective population-based study

OBJECTIVES

For oncological care, there is a clear tendency towards centralisation and collaboration aimed at improving patient outcomes. However, in market-based healthcare systems, this trend is related to the potential trade-off between hospital volume and hospital competition. We analyse the association between hospital volume, competition from neighbouring hospitals and outcomes for patients who underwent surgery for invasive breast cancer (IBC).

OUTCOME MEASURES

Surgical margins, 90 days re-excision, overall survival.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS

In this population-based study, we use data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Our study sample consists of 136 958 patients who underwent surgery for IBC between 2004 and 2014 in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

Our findings show that treatment types as well as patient and tumour characteristics explain most of the variation in all outcomes. After adjusting for confounding variables and intrahospital correlation in multivariate logistic regressions, hospital volume and competition from neighbouring hospitals did not show significant associations with surgical margins and re-excision rates. For patients who underwent surgery in hospitals annually performing 250 surgeries or more, multilevel Cox proportional hazard models show that survival was somewhat higher (HR 0.94). Survival in hospitals with four or more (potential) competitors within 30 km was slightly higher (HR 0.97). However, this effect did not hold after changing this proxy for hospital competition.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the selection of patient outcomes, hospital volume and regional competition appear to play only a limited role in the explanation of variation in IBC outcomes across Dutch hospitals. Further research into hospital variation for high-volume tumours like the one studied here is recommended to (i) use consistently measured quality indicators that better reflect multidisciplinary clinical practice and patient and provider decision-making, (ii) include more sophisticated measures for hospital competition and (iii) assess the entire process of care within the hospital, as well as care provided by other providers in cancer networks.

Fragmentation of practice: The adverse effect of surgeons moving around

BACKGROUND

Whether surgical team familiarity is associated with improved postoperative outcomes remains unknown. We sought to characterize the impact of fragmented surgical practice on the likelihood that a patient would experience a textbook outcome, which is a validated patient-centric composite outcome representing an "ideal" postoperative outcome.

METHOD

Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older who underwent elective inpatient abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, coronary artery bypass graft, cholecystectomy, colectomy, or lung resection were identified. Rate of fragmented practice was calculated based on the total number of surgical procedures of interest performed over the study period (2013-2017) divided by the number of different hospitals in which the surgeon operated. Surgeons were categorized into "low," "average," "above average," or "high" rate of fragmented practice categories using an unsupervised machine learning technique known k-medians cluster analysis.

RESULTS

Among 546,422 Medicare beneficiaries who underwent an elective surgical procedure of interest (coronary artery bypass graft: n = 156,384, 28.6%; lung resection: n = 83,164, 15.2%; abdominal aortic aneurysm: n = 112,578, 20.6%; cholecystectomy: n = 42,955, 7.9%; colectomy: n = 151,341, 27.7%), median patient age was 74 years (interquartile range: 69-80), and most patients were male (n = 319,153, 58.4%). Machine learning identified 3 cutoffs to categorize rate of fragmented practice: 2.8%, 5.6%, and 10.6%. Overall, the majority of surgical procedures were performed by surgeons with a low rate of fragmented practice (n = 382,504, 70.0%); other surgical procedures were performed by surgeons with average (n = 109,141, 20.0%), above average (n = 44,249, 8.1%), or high (n = 10,528, 1.9%) rate of fragmented practice. On multivariable analyses, after controlling for patient demographics, individual surgeon volume, procedure type, and a random effect for hospital, patients who underwent a surgical procedure by a high versus low rate of fragmented practice surgeon had lower odds to achieve a postoperative textbook outcome (odds ratio 0.71, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.84). Patients who underwent a procedure by a high rate of fragmented practice surgeon also had increased odds of a perioperative complication (odds ratio 1.30, 95% confidence interval: 1.23-1.37), extended length of stay (odds ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.11-1.24), 90-day readmission (odds ratio 1.17, 95% confidence interval: 1.11-1.23), and 90-day mortality (odds ratio 1.29, 95% confidence interval: 1.17-1.42) (all P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing a surgical procedure by a surgeon with a high rate of fragmented practice had lower odds of achieving an optimal postoperative textbook outcome. Surgical team familiarity, measured by a surgeon rate of fragmented practice, may represent a modifiable mechanism to improve surgical outcomes.

Surgical volume threshold to improve 3-year survival in designated cancer care hospitals in 2004-2012 in Japan

In Japan, cancer care hospitals designated by the national government have a surgical volume requirement of 400 annually, which is not necessarily defined based on patient outcomes. This study aimed to estimate surgical volume thresholds that ensure optimal 3‐year survival for three periods. In total, 186 965 patients who had undergone surgery for solid cancers in 66 designated cancer care hospitals in Osaka between 2004 and 2012 were examined using data from a population‐based cancer registry. These hospitals were categorized by the annual surgical volume of each 50 surgeries (eg, 0‐49, 50‐99, and so on). Using multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression, we estimated the adjusted 3‐year survival probability per surgical volume category for 2004‐2006, 2007‐2009, and 2010‐2012. Using the joinpoint regression model that computes inflection points in a linear relationship, we estimated the points at which the trend of the association between surgical volume and survival probability changes, defining them as surgical volume thresholds. The adjusted 3‐year survival ranges were 71.7%‐90.0%, 68.2%‐90.0%, and 79.2%‐90.3% in 2004‐2006, 2007‐2009, and 2010‐2012, respectively. The surgical volume thresholds were identified at 100‐149 in 2004‐2006 and 2007‐2009 and 200‐249 in 2010‐2012. The extents of change in the adjusted 3‐year survival probability per increase of 50 surgical volumes were +4.00%, +6.88%, and +1.79% points until the threshold and +0.41%, +0.30%, and +0.11% points after the threshold in 2004‐2006, 2007‐2009, and 2010‐2012, respectively. The existing surgical volume requirements met our estimated thresholds. Surgical volume thresholds based on the association with patient survival may be used as a reference to validate the surgical volume requirement.

Hospital volume-outcome relationship in total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis aimed to investigate the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes for total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL and CINAHL were searched up to February 2020 for randomised controlled trials and cohort studies that reported TKA performed in hospitals with at least two different volumes and any associated patient-relevant outcomes. The adjusted effect estimates (odds ratios, OR) were pooled using a random-effects, linear dose-response meta-analysis. Heterogeneity was quantified using the I²-statistic. ROBINS-I and the GRADE approach were used to assess the risk of bias and the confidence in the cumulative evidence, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 68 cohort studies with data from 1985 to 2018 were included. The risk of bias for all outcomes ranged from moderate to critical. Higher hospital volume may be associated with a lower rate of early revision ≤ 12 months (narrative synthesis of k = 7 studies, n = 301,378 patients) and is likely associated with lower mortality ≤ 3 months (OR = 0.91 per additional 50 TKAs/year, 95% confidence interval [0.87-0.95], k = 9, n = 2,638,996, I² = 51%) and readmissions ≤ 3 months (OR = 0.98 [0.97-0.99], k = 3, n = 830,381, I² = 44%). Hospital volume may not be associated with the rates of deep infections within 1-4 years, late revision (1-10 years) or adverse events ≤ 3 months. The confidence in the cumulative evidence was moderate for mortality and readmission rates; low for early revision rates; and very low for deep infection, late revision and adverse event rates.

CONCLUSION

An inverse volume-outcome relationship probably exists for some TKA outcomes, including mortality and readmissions, and may exist for early revisions. Small reductions in unfavourable outcomes may be clinically relevant at the population level, supporting centralisation of TKA to high-volume hospitals.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42019131209 available at: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=131209 ).

Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: Time to rethink

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Complex surgery and radiotherapy are the central pillars of loco-regional oncology treatment. This paper describes the reimbursement schemes used in radiation and complex surgical oncology, reports on literature and policy reviews.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review of the literature of the reimbursement models has been carried out separately for radiotherapy and complex cancer surgery based on PRISMA guidelines. Using searches of PubMed and grey literature, we identified articles from scientific journals and reports published since 2000 on provider payment or reimbursement systems currently used in radiation oncology and complex cancer surgery, also including policy models.

RESULTS

Most European health systems reimburse radiotherapy using a budget-based, fee-for-service or fraction-based system; while few reimburse services according to an episode-based model. Also, the reimbursement models for cancer surgery are mostly restricted to differences embedded in the DRG system and adjustments applied to the fees, based on the complexity of each surgical procedure. There is an enormous variability in reimbursement across countries, resulting in different incentives and different amounts paid for the same therapeutic strategy.

CONCLUSION

A reimbursement policy, based on the episode of care as the basic payment unit, is advocated for. Innovation should be tackled in a two-tier approach: one defining the common criteria for reimbursement of proven evidence-based interventions; another for financing emerging innovation with uncertain definitive value. Relevant clinical and economic data, also collected real-life, should support reimbursement systems that mirror the actual cost of evidence-based practice.

Innovation, value and reimbursement in radiation and complex surgical oncology: time to rethink

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Complex surgery and radiotherapy are the central pillars of loco-regional oncology treatment. This paper describes the reimbursement schemes used in radiation and complex surgical oncology, reports on literature and policy reviews.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review of the literature of the reimbursement models has been carried out separately for radiotherapy and complex cancer surgery based on PRISMA guidelines. Using searches of PubMed and grey literature, we identified articles from scientific journals and reports published since 2000 on provider payment or reimbursement systems currently used in radiation oncology and complex cancer surgery, also including policy models.

RESULTS

Most European health systems reimburse radiotherapy using a budget-based, fee-for-service or fraction-based system; while few reimburse services according to an episode-based model. Also, the reimbursement models for cancer surgery are mostly restricted to differences embedded in the DRG system and adjustments applied to the fees, based on the complexity of each surgical procedure. There is an enormous variability in reimbursement across countries, resulting in different incentives and different amounts paid for the same therapeutic strategy.

CONCLUSION

A reimbursement policy, based on the episode of care as the basic payment unit, is advocated for. Innovation should be tackled in a two-tier approach: one defining the common criteria for reimbursement of proven evidence-based interventions; another for financing emerging innovation with uncertain definitive value. Relevant clinical and economic data, also collected real-life, should support reimbursement systems that mirror the actual cost of evidence-based practice.

Perspective of potential patients on the hospital volume-outcome relationship and the minimum volume threshold for total knee arthroplasty: a qualitative focus group and interview study

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is performed to treat end-stage knee osteoarthritis. In Germany, a minimum volume threshold of 50 TKAs/hospital/year was implemented to ensure outcome quality. This study, embedded within a systematic review, aimed to investigate the perspectives of potential TKA patients on the hospital volume-outcome relationship for TKA (higher volumes associated with better outcomes).

METHODS

A convenience sample of adults with knee problems and heterogeneous demographic characteristics participated in the study. Qualitative data were collected during a focus group prior to the systematic review (n = 5) and during telephone interviews, in which preliminary results of the systematic review were discussed (n = 16). The data were synthesised using content analysis.

RESULTS

All participants (n = 21) believed that a hospital volume-outcome relationship exists for TKA while recognising that patient behaviour or the surgeon could also influence outcomes. All participants would be willing to travel longer for better outcomes. Most interviewees would choose a hospital for TKA depending on reputation, recommendations, and service quality. However, some would also choose a hospital based on the results of the systematic review that showed slightly lower mortality/revision rates at higher-volume hospitals. Half of the interviewees supported raising the minimum volume threshold even if this were to increase travel time to receive TKA.

CONCLUSIONS

Potential patients believe that a hospital volume-outcome relationship exists for TKA. Hospital preference is based mainly on subjective factors, although some potential patients would consider scientific evidence when making their choice. Policy makers and physicians should consider the patient perspectives when deciding on minimum volume thresholds or recommending hospitals for TKA, respectively.

Three-year survival from diagnosis in surgically treated patients in designated and nondesignated cancer care hospitals in Japan

The Japanese national and prefectural governments have accredited high-capacity, high-experience cancer care hospitals as "designated cancer care hospitals" to standardize cancer care, centralize patients, and improve clinical outcomes, but the performance of these designated hospitals has not been evaluated. We retrospectively compared 3-year patient survival in national, prefectural, and nondesignated cancer care hospitals in 2010-2012 in Osaka using registry-based data of 86 456 surgically treated cancer patients aged 15 years or older. Hazard ratios and 3-year survival probabilities were compared among national, prefectural, and nondesignated hospitals using a Cox proportional hazard regression model. Subgroup analyses for six cancers (stomach, colorectum, lung, breast, uterus, and prostate) and other cancers were carried out. In 2010-2012, 36 634 (42.4%), 38 048 (44.0%), and 11 774 (13.6%) patients were treated at national, prefectural, and nondesignated hospitals, respectively. The mortality hazard for all-site cancer was significantly lower in national and prefectural designated hospitals (adjusted hazard ratio 0.60 [95% confidence interval, 0.53-0.68] and 0.72 [0.66-0.80], respectively) than in nondesignated hospitals. The adjusted 3-year survival probabilities for all-site cancer were 86.6%, 84.2%, and 78.8% in national, prefectural, and nondesignated hospitals, respectively. Site-specific subgroup analyses revealed significantly lower hazard ratios in national and prefectural hospitals than in nondesignated hospitals for stomach, colorectal, lung, breast, and other cancers. To conclude, the majority of cancer patients underwent surgeries at designated hospitals and had higher 3-year survival probabilities than those treated at nondesignated hospitals. Further centralization of patients from nondesignated to designated hospitals could improve population-level survival.

Hospital volume and postoperative survival for three urological cancers: Prostate, kidney, and bladder

OBJECTIVE

To examine the association between hospital volume and postoperative 5-year survival for patients with prostate, kidney, and bladder cancer.

METHOD

Using Osaka Cancer Registry data, we identified 9285 patients who were diagnosed as having prostate, kidney, or bladder cancer and who underwent surgery between 2007 and 2011 in Osaka, Japan. The surgical hospital volume of each hospital was calculated and then divided into quartiles (high, medium, low, very low). We estimated the hazard ratios of hospital volume (quartiles) for 5-year survival using Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

For all three cancer sites, the mortality hazard of hospitals with the lowest hospital volume was significantly higher than that of hospitals with the highest volume. The difference in adjusted 5-year survival rates between hospitals with the highest and lowest hospital volume was 3.6% for prostate cancer, 6.6% for kidney cancer, and 13.3% for bladder cancer.

CONCLUSION

Hospital surgical volume seems to affect 5-year survival for patients with urological cancers, especially kidney and bladder cancer.

What works? The association of organisational structure, reforms and interventions on efficiency in treating hip fractures

Many studies indicate huge regional and hospital-level differences in health care performance. In order to increase health system efficiency, it is important to know the reasons behind the differences and analyse the effects of those factors that can be affected by health policy. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare various organisational factors and health policy interventions in the performance of the care of hip fracture patients in Finland. We analysed the relationship between organisational factors (hospital volume, regional concentration of treatments) and performance. The focus is also on the effects of two macro-level organisational changes (integration of production of all health and social services in one provider) and two micro-level interventions (integrated patient pathway interventions, aiming to discharge patients as soon as possible). Our results indicate that macro-level integration of the production or financing of health and social services, bigger hospital volumes, and the concentration of the acute phase of care in fewer hospitals within hospital districts were not consistently related to efficiency in the care of hip fracture patients. Instead, efficiency can be increased using micro-level interventions aiming to coordinate patient pathways at the patient group level.

Association between operation volume and postoperative mortality in the elective open repair of infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms: systematic review

Background

An inverse association between the case volume per hospital and surgeon and perioperative mortality has been shown for many surgical interventions. There are numerous studies on this issue for the open treatment of infrarenal aortic aneurysms.

Aim

To present the available data on the association between the case volume per hospital and surgeon and perioperative mortality in the elective open repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms in a systematic review.

Materials and methods

Using the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science Core Collection, CINAHL, Current Contents Medicine (CCMed), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases, a systematic search was performed using defined keywords. From the search results, all original papers were included that compared the elective open repair of an infrarenal aortic aneurysm in a “high volume” center with a “low volume” center or by a “high volume” surgeon with a “low volume” surgeon, as defined in the respective study.

Results

After deduplication, the literature search yielded 1021 hits of which 60 publications met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 37/43 studies showed a lower mortality in “high volume” compared to “low volume” centers and 14/17 comparisons showed a lower mortality for “high volume” compared to “low volume” surgeons. The effect measures, usually odds ratios, ranged from 0.37 to 0.99 for volume per hospital and 0.31 to 0.92 for volume per surgeon. Regarding the threshold values for the definition of “high volume” and “low volume,” a clear heterogeneity was shown between the individual studies.

Discussion

The available data on the association between the case volume per hospital and surgeon and perioperative mortality in the elective open repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms show that interventions performed in “high volume” centers or by “high volume” surgeons are associated with lower mortality. To ensure the best possible outcome in terms of low perioperative mortality in the open repair of infrarenal aortic aneurysms, the aim should be centralization with high case volume per hospital and surgeon.

Relationship between volume and outcome for surgery on congenital diaphragmatic hernia: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Congenital diaphragmatic hernia (CDH) is a rare and life-threatening anomaly that needs surgical therapy after clinical stabilization of the neonate. Given an existing volume-outcome relationship for other high-risk, low volume procedures, we aimed at examining the relationship between hospital or surgeon volume and outcomes for surgery on CDH.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic search in multiple databases in September 2019 and searched for additional literature. We assessed risk of bias of included studies using ROBINS-I and synthesized results in a structured narrative way using GRADE.

RESULTS

We included 5 cohort studies on hospital volume. Results for in-hospital mortality, one-year mortality and length of stay are inconclusive. The certainty of the evidence was very low for all outcomes, due to risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. We did not identify any study on surgeon volume.

CONCLUSION

Due to the very low certainty of the evidence it is uncertain whether higher hospital volume is associated with favorable outcomes for neonates undergoing surgery for CDH. There is no evidence on the relationship between surgeon volume and outcomes. Future studies should use more rigorous methodology and analyze additional outcomes to allow for more meaningful inferences.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42018090231).

Impact of suspending minimum volume requirements for knee arthroplasty on hospitals in Germany: an uncontrolled before-after study

Background

In 2004, the Federal Joint Committee, supreme decision-making body in German healthcare, introduced minimum volume requirements (MVRQs) as a quality instrument. Since then, MVRQs were implemented for seven hospital procedures. This study evaluates the effect of a system-wide intermission of MVRQ for total knee arthroplasty (TKA), demanding 50 annual cases per hospital.

Methods

An uncontrolled before–after study based on federal-level data including the number of hospitals performing TKA, and TKA cases from the external hospital quality assurance programme in Germany (2004–2017). Bi- and multivariate analyses based on hospital-level secondary data of TKA cases and TKA quality indicators extracted from hospital quality reports in Germany (2006–2014).

Results

The number of TKAs performed in Germany decreased by 11% after suspending the TKA-MVRQ in 2011, and rose by 13% after its reintroduction in 2015. The number of hospitals with less than 50 cases rose from 10 to 25% and their case share from 2 to 5.5% during suspension. Change in hospital volume after the suspension of TKA-MVRQ was not associated with hospital size, ownership, or region. All four evaluable quality indicators increased significantly in the year after their first public reporting. Compared to hospitals meeting the TKA-MVRQ, three indicators show slight but statistically significant better quality in hospitals below the TKA-MVRQ.

Conclusions

In Germany, TKA-MVRQs seem to induce in-hospital caseload adjustments rather than foster regional inter-hospital case transfers as intended.

Minimum volume standards in day surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The aim was to find out if and for what indications are minimum volume standards (MVS) applied in the day surgery setting and whether the application of MVS improves patient relevant outcomes.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive systematic literature search in seven databases on July 12th, 2019. Concerning effectiveness and safety, the data retrieved from the selected studies were systematically extracted into data-extraction tables. Two independent researchers (MS, CS) systematically assessed the quality of evidence using the quality assessment tool for individual studies of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) called Task Force Checklist for Quality Assessment of Retrospective Database Studies. No instances of disagreement occurred. No further data processing was applied.

RESULTS

The systematic literature search, together with hand search, yielded 595 hits. No prospective or controlled studies were found. Data from eight retrospective studies were used in the analysis of clinical effectiveness and safety on seven indications: anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction, cataract surgery, meniscectomy, thyroidectomy, primary hip arthroscopy, open carpal tunnel release, and rotator cuff repair. All interventions (except for carpal tunnel release and thyroidectomy) confirmed a volume-outcome relationship (VOR) with relation to surgeon/hospital volume, however, none established MVS for the respective interventions. Safety related data were reported without its relationship to surgeon/hospital volume.

CONCLUSIONS

This present paper provides some evidence in favor of the VOR, however, it based on low quality retrospective data-analyses. The present results cannot offer any clear-cut MVS thresholds for the day surgery setting and so the simple transition from inpatient results (that support MVS) to the day surgery setting is questionable. Further quality assuring policy approaches should be considered.

Simulating the impact of centralization of prostate cancer surgery services on travel burden and equity in the English National Health Service: A national population based model for health service re-design

Introduction

There is limited evidence on the impact of centralization of cancer treatment services on patient travel burden and access to treatment. Using prostate cancer surgery as an example, this national study analysis aims to simulate the effect of different centralization scenarios on the number of center closures, patient travel times, and equity in access.

Methods

We used patient‐level data on all men (n = 19,256) undergoing radical prostatectomy in the English National Health Service between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2014, and considered three scenarios for centralization of prostate cancer surgery services A: procedure volume, B: availability of specialized services, and C: optimization of capacity. The probability of patients travelling to each of the remaining centers in the choice set was predicted using a conditional logit model, based on preferences revealed through actual hospital selections. Multivariable linear regression analysed the impact on travel time according to patient characteristics.

Results

Scenarios A, B, and C resulted in the closure of 28, 24, and 37 of the 65 radical prostatectomy centers, respectively, affecting 3993 (21%), 5763 (30%), and 7896 (41%) of the men in the study. Despite similar numbers of center closures the expected average increase on travel time was very different for scenario B (+15 minutes) and A (+28 minutes). A distance minimization approach, assigning patients to their next nearest center, with patient preferences not considered, estimated a lower impact on travel burden in all scenarios. The additional travel burden on older, sicker, less affluent patients was evident, but where significant, the absolute difference was very small.

Conclusion

The study provides an innovative simulation approach using national patient‐level datasets, patient preferences based on actual hospital selections, and personal characteristics to inform health service planning. With this approach, we demonstrated for prostate cancer surgery that three different centralization scenarios would lead to similar number of center closures but to different increases in patient travel time, whilst all having a minimal impact on equity.

Hospital volume and postoperative 5-year survival for five different cancer sites: A population-based study in Japan

The relationship between hospital volume and patient outcome is globally known; thus, hospital volume is widely used as a quality indicator. In Japan, however, recent studies on this topic are scarce. The present study examined whether hospital surgery volume is associated with postoperative 5-year survival among cancer patients. Using the Osaka Cancer Registry, we identified a sample of 86 145 patients who were diagnosed with cancer at any of five different sites (stomach, colorectum, lung, breast and uterus) and underwent surgeries between 2007 and 2011 in Osaka. We ranked hospitals by annual surgical volume, sorted patients in descending order by hospital volume, and assigned them into quartiles (high, medium, low and very low volume). We analyzed the association between hospital volume and 5-year survival among 80 959 patients aged between 15 and 84 years using Cox proportional hazard models. Adjustments were made for characteristics of patients, type of surgery and adjuvant treatment received. The mortality hazard of patients treated at very low-volume hospitals was 1.36-1.82-fold higher than that of patients treated at high-volume hospitals. Absolute differences in adjusted survival rates between high-volume and very low-volume hospitals varied with the cancer site: 14.9 in stomach, 11.5 in colorectal, 10.8 in lung, 2.4 in breast and 3.3 in uterine cancers. Hospitals with lower surgery volumes showed higher mortality risks after cancer surgery than those with higher volumes. Monitoring site-specific surgery volumes and referring patients from low-volume to high-volume hospitals may be beneficial for improving the long-term survival of cancer patients.