Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30066065›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2018

Implications of Hospital Volume on Costs Following Esophagectomy in the United States.

Gregory T Kennedy, Benjamin D Ukert, Jarrod D Predina, Andrew D Newton, John C Kucharczuk, Daniel Polsky, Sunil Singhal

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Regionalization of esophagectomy: where are we now?Journal of thoracic disease · 2019
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Gregory T KennedyDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, 6 White Building, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Benjamin D UkertThe Wharton School and Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Jarrod D PredinaDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, 6 White Building, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Andrew D NewtonDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, 6 White Building, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
John C KucharczukDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, 6 White Building, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Daniel PolskyThe Wharton School and Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
Sunil SinghalDepartment of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, 6 White Building, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. Sunil.Singhal@uphs.upenn.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWith increasing focus on health care quality and cost containment, volume-based referral strategies have been proposed to improve value in high-cost procedures, such as esophagectomy. While the effect of hospital volume on outcomes has been demonstrated, our goal was to evaluate the economic consequences of volume-based referral practices for esophagectomy.

methodsThe nationwide inpatient sample (NIS) was queried for the years 2004-2013 for all patients undergoing esophagectomy. Patients were stratified by hospital volume quartile and substratified by preoperative risk and age. Clustered multivariable hierarchical logistic regression analysis was used to assess adjusted costs and mortality.

resultsIn total, 9270 patients were clustered based on annual hospital volume quartiles of < 7, 7 to 22, 23 to 87, and > 87 esophagectomies. After stratification by patient variables, high-volume centers performed esophagectomies in high-risk patients at the same cost as low-volume centers without significant difference in resource utilization. Overall, mortality decreased across volume quartiles (lowest 8.9 versus highest 3.6%, p < 0.0001). The greatest volume-mortality differences were observed among patients aged between 70 and 80 years (lowest 12.2 versus highest 6.2%, p = 0.009). Patients with high preoperative risk also derived mortality benefits with increasing hospital volume (lowest 17.5 versus highest 11.8%, p < 0.0001).

conclusionsThis study demonstrates that the mortality improvements for high-risk patients undergoing esophagectomy at high-volume centers do not come at increased costs. These results suggest that health systems should consider selectively referring high-risk patients to high-volume centers within their region.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsDatabases, FactualEsophagectomyFemaleHealth Care CostsHospital MortalityHospitals, High-VolumeHospitals, Low-VolumeHumansMaleMiddle AgedReferral and ConsultationRisk FactorsUnited StatesEsophagectomyVolume-cost relationshipVolume-outcome relationship

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.