Quantifying severe urinary complications after radical prostatectomy: the development and validation of a surgical performance indicator using hospital administrative data

The future of cancer care in the UK-time for a radical and sustainable National Cancer Plan

Cancer affects one in two people in the UK and the incidence is set to increase. The UK National Health Service is facing major workforce deficits and cancer services have struggled to recover after the COVID-19 pandemic, with waiting times for cancer care becoming the worst on record. There are severe and widening disparities across the country and survival rates remain unacceptably poor for many cancers. This is at a time when cancer care has become increasingly complex, specialised, and expensive. The current crisis has deep historic roots, and to be reversed, the scale of the challenge must be acknowledged and a fundamental reset is required. The loss of a dedicated National Cancer Control Plan in England and Wales, poor operationalisation of plans elsewhere in the UK, and the closure of the National Cancer Research Institute have all added to a sense of strategic misdirection. The UK finds itself at a crossroads, where the political decisions of governments, the cancer community, and research funders will determine whether we can, together, achieve equitable, affordable, and high-quality cancer care for patients that is commensurate with our wealth, and position our outcomes among the best in the world. In this Policy Review, we describe the challenges and opportunities that are needed to develop radical, yet sustainable plans, which are comprehensive, evidence-based, integrated, patient-outcome focused, and deliver value for money.

An observational study of volume-outcome effects for robot-assisted radical prostatectomy in England

OBJECTIVES

To investigate volume-outcome relationships in robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) for cancer using data from the Hospital Episodes Statistics (HES) database for England.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data for all adult, elective RPs for cancer during the period January 2013-December 2018 (inclusive) were extracted from the HES database. The HES database records data on all National Health Service (NHS) hospital admissions in England. Data were extracted for the NHS trust and surgeon undertaking the procedure, the surgical technique used (laparoscopic, open or robot-assisted), hospital length of stay (LOS), emergency readmissions, and deaths. Multilevel modelling was used to adjust for hierarchy and covariates.

RESULTS

Data were available for 35 629 RPs (27 945 RARPs). The proportion of procedures conducted as RARPs increased from 53.2% in 2013 to 92.6% in 2018. For RARP, there was a significant relationship between 90-day emergency hospital readmission (primary outcome) and trust volume (odds ratio [OR] for volume decrease of 10 procedures: 0.99, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99-1.00; P = 0.037) and surgeon volume (OR for volume decrease of 10 procedures: 0.99, 95% CI 0.99-1.00; P = 0.013) in the previous year. From lowest to highest volume category there was a decline in the adjusted proportion of patients readmitted as an emergency at 90 days from 10.6% (0-49 procedures) to 7.0% (≥300 procedures) for trusts and from 9.4% (0-9 procedures) to 8.3% (≥100 procedures) for surgeons. LOS was also significantly associated with surgeon and trust volume, although 1-year mortality was associated with neither.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence of a volume-outcome relationship for RARP in England and minimising low-volume RARP will improve patient outcomes. Nevertheless, the observed effect size was relatively modest, and stakeholders should be realistic when evaluating the likely impact of further centralisation at a population level.

How reliable are surgeon-reported data? A comparison of the British Association of Urological Surgeons radical prostatectomy audit with the National Prostate Cancer Audit Hospital Episode Statistics-linked database

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the accuracy and completeness of surgeon-reported radical prostatectomy outcome data across a national health system by comparison with a national dataset gathered independently from clinicians directly involved in patient care.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data submitted by surgeons to the British Association of Urological Surgeons (BAUS) radical prostatectomy audit for all men undergoing radical prostatectomy between 2015 and 2016 were assessed by cross linkage to the National Prostate Cancer Audit (NPCA) database. Specific data items collected in both databases were selected for comparison analysis. Data completeness and agreement were assessed by percentages and Cohen's kappa statistic.

RESULTS

Data from 4707 men in the BAUS and NPCA databases were matched for comparison. Compared with the NPCA, dataset completeness was higher in the BAUS dataset for type of nerve-sparing procedure (92% vs 42%) and postoperative margin status (89% vs 48%) but lower for readmission (87% vs 100%) and Charlson score (80% vs 100%). For all other variables assessed completeness was comparable. Agreement and data reliability were high for most variables. However, despite good agreement, the inter-cohort reliability was poor for readmission, M stage and Charlson score (κ < 0.30).

CONCLUSIONS

For the first time in urology we show that surgeon-reported data from the BAUS radical prostatectomy audit can reliably be used to benchmark peri-operative radical prostatectomy outcomes. For comorbidity data, to assist with risk analysis, and longer-term outcomes, NPCA routinely collected data provide a more comprehensive source.

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.

Impact of patient choice and hospital competition on patient outcomes after prostate cancer surgery: A national population-based study

BACKGROUND

Policies that encourage patient choice and hospital competition have been introduced across several countries with the purpose of improving the quality of health care services. The objective of the current national cohort study was to analyze the correlation between choice and competition on outcomes after cancer surgery using prostate cancer as a case study.

METHODS

The analyses included all men who underwent prostate cancer surgery in the United Kingdom between 2008 and 2011 (n = 12,925). Multilevel logistic regression was used to assess the effect of a radical prostatectomy center being located in a competitive environment (based on the number of centers within a threshold distance) and being a successful competitor (based on the ability to attract patients from other hospitals) on 3 patient-level outcomes: postoperative length of hospital stay >3 days, 30-day emergency readmissions, and 2-year urinary complications.

RESULTS

With adjustment for patient characteristics, men who underwent surgery in centers located in a stronger competitive environment were less likely to have a 30-day emergency readmission, irrespective of the type or volume of procedures performed at each center (odds ratio, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.36-0.60; P = .005). Men who received treatment at centers that were successful competitors were less likely to have a length of hospital stay >3 days (odds ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.94; P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS

The current results suggest for the first time that hospital competition improves short-term outcomes after prostate cancer surgery. Further evaluation of the potential role of patient choice and hospital competition is required to inform health service design in contrast to the role of top-down-driven approaches, which have focused on centralization of services.

National cohort study comparing severe medium-term urinary complications after robot-assisted vs laparoscopic vs retropubic open radical prostatectomy

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the occurrence of severe urinary complications within 2 years of surgery in men undergoing either robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP), laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) or retropubic open radical prostatectomy (ORP).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study in men who underwent RARP (n = 4 947), LRP (n = 5 479) or ORP (n = 6 873) between 2008 and 2012 in the English National Health Service (NHS) using national cancer registry records linked to Hospital Episodes Statistics, an administrative database of admissions to NHS hospitals. We identified the occurrence of any severe urinary or severe stricture-related complication within 2 years of surgery using a validated tool. Multi-level regression modelling was used to determine the association between the type of surgery and occurrence of complications, with adjustment for patient and surgical factors.

RESULTS

Men undergoing RARP were least likely to experience any urinary complication (10.5%) or a stricture-related complication (3.3%) compared with those who had LRP (15.8% any or 5.7% stricture-related) or ORP (19.1% any or 6.9% stricture-related). The impact of the type of surgery on the occurrence of any urinary or stricture-related complications remained statistically significant after adjustment for patient and surgical factors (P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Men who underwent RARP had the lowest risk of developing severe urinary complications within 2 years of surgery.

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy vs laparoscopic and open retropubic radical prostatectomy: functional outcomes 18 months after diagnosis from a national cohort study in England

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) has been rapidly adopted without robust evidence comparing its functional outcomes against laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) or open retropubic radical prostatectomy (ORP) approaches. This study compared patient-reported functional outcomes following RARP, LRP or ORP.

METHODS

All men diagnosed with prostate cancer in England during April - October 2014 who underwent radical prostatectomy were identified from the National Prostate Cancer Audit and mailed a questionnaire 18 months after diagnosis. Group differences in patient-reported sexual, urinary, bowel and hormonal function (EPIC-26 domain scores) and generic health-related quality of life (HRQoL; EQ-5D-5L scores), with adjustment for patient and tumour characteristics, were estimated using linear regression.

RESULTS

In all, 2219 men (77.0%) responded; 1310 (59.0%) had RARP, 487 (21.9%) LRP and 422 (19.0%) ORP. RARP was associated with slightly higher adjusted mean EPIC-26 sexual function scores compared with LRP (3·5 point difference; 95% CI: 1.1-5.9, P=0.004) or ORP (4.0 point difference; 95% CI: 1.5-6.5, P=0.002), which did not meet the threshold for a minimal clinically important difference (10-12 points). There were no significant differences in other EPIC-26 domain scores or HRQoL.

CONCLUSIONS

It is unlikely that the rapid adoption of RARP in the English NHS has produced substantial improvements in functional outcomes for patients.

National Population-Based Study Comparing Treatment-Related Toxicity in Men Who Received Intensity Modulated Versus 3-Dimensional Conformal Radical Radiation Therapy for Prostate Cancer

PURPOSE

To compare, in a national population-based study, severe genitourinary (GU) and gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity in patients with prostate cancer who were treated with radical intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) or 3-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3D-CRT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients treated with IMRT (n=6933) or 3D-CRT (n=16,289) between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2013 in the English National Health Service were identified using cancer registry data, the National Radiotherapy Dataset, and Hospital Episodes Statistics, the administrative database of care episodes in National Health Service hospitals. We developed a coding system that identifies severe toxicity (at least grade 3 according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events scoring system) according to the presence of a procedure and a corresponding diagnostic code in patients' Hospital Episodes Statistics records after radiation therapy. A competing risks regression analysis was used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs), comparing the incidence of severe GI and GU complications after IMRT and 3D-CRT, adjusting for patient, disease, and treatment characteristics.

RESULTS

The use of IMRT, as opposed to 3D-CRT, increased from 3.1% in 2010 to 64.7% in 2013. Patients who received IMRT were less likely than those receiving 3D-CRT to experience severe GI toxicity (4.9 vs 6.5 per 100 person-years; adjusted HR 0.66; 95% confidence interval 0.61-0.72) but had similar levels of GU toxicity (2.3 vs 2.4 per 100 person-years; adjusted HR 0.94; 95% confidence interval 0.84-1.06).

CONCLUSIONS

Prostate cancer patients who received radical radiation therapy using IMRT were less likely to experience severe GI toxicity, and they had similar GU toxicity compared with those who received 3D-CRT. These findings in an unselected "real-world" population support the use of IMRT, but further cost-effectiveness studies are urgently required.