Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30374815›Full record

ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract2019

Combining Surgical Outcomes and Patient Experiences to Evaluate Hospital Gastrointestinal Cancer Surgery Quality.

Jason B Liu, Andrea L Pusic, Bruce L Hall, Robert E Glasgow, Clifford Y Ko, Larissa K Temple

Abstract readMulticenter Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
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

6 authors.

Jason B LiuAmerican College of Surgeons, 633 N. St. Clair St., 22nd floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA. jliu@facs.org.
Andrea L PusicDivision of Plastic Surgery, Patient-Reported Outcomes, Value, and Experience (PROVE) Center, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Bruce L HallAmerican College of Surgeons, 633 N. St. Clair St., 22nd floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Robert E GlasgowDepartment of Surgery, University of Utah Health, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Clifford Y KoAmerican College of Surgeons, 633 N. St. Clair St., 22nd floor, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA.
Larissa K TempleDivision of Colorectal Surgery, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAssessments of surgical quality should consider both surgeon and patient perspectives simultaneously. Focusing on patients undergoing major gastrointestinal cancer surgery, we sought to characterize hospitals, and their patients, on both these axes of quality.

methodsUsing the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program registry, hospitals were profiled on a risk-adjusted composite measure of death or serious morbidity (DSM) generated from patients who underwent colectomy, esophagectomy, hepatectomy, pancreatectomy, or proctectomy for cancer between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2016. These hospitals were also profiled using the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey. Highest-performing hospitals on both quality axes, and their respective patients, were compared to the lowest-performing hospitals.

resultsOverall, 60,526 patients underwent their cancer operation at 530 hospitals. There were 38 highest- and 48 lowest-performing hospitals. The correlation between quality axes was poor (ρ = 0.10). Compared to the lowest-performing hospitals, the highest-performing hospitals were more often NCI-designated cancer centers (29.0% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.002) and cared for a lower proportion of Medicaid patients (0.14 vs. 0.23, p < 0.001). Patients who had their operations at the lowest- versus highest-performing hospitals were more often black (17.2% vs. 8.4%, p < 0.001), Hispanic (8.3% vs. 3.5%, p < 0.001), functionally dependent (3.8% vs. 0.9%, p < 0.001), and not admitted from home (4.4% vs. 2.4%, p < 0.001).

conclusionsHospital performance varied when assessed by both risk-adjusted surgical outcomes and patient experiences. In this study, poor-performing hospitals appeared to be disproportionately serving disadvantaged and minority cancer patients.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionQuality ImprovementRegistriesCancer Care FacilitiesDigestive System Surgical ProceduresFemaleGastrointestinal NeoplasmsHospitalsHumansMaleMiddle AgedTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesCancer surgeryNSQIPOutcomesPatient-reported experiencesPatient-reported outcomesQuality

Identifiers

PMID30374815

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.