ArticleDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2020
[Minimum volumes in surgical treatment of lung cancer : A survey of thoracic surgeons in Germany on the introduction of a minimum volume regulation for surgical treatment of lung cancer].
Article in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anticipated effects of centralising complex gastrointestinal surgery in a rural area in Germany - perspective of health professionals: a qualitative study.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- [Minimum case volumes from the perspective of university providers].Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen · 2022Review
- Determinants of orthopedic physicians' self-reported compliance with surgical site infection prevention: results of the WACH-trial's pilot survey on COM-B factors in a German university hospital.Antimicrobial resistance and infection control · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Federal Joint Committee (G‑BA) is currently discussing the introduction of new minimum volume regulations (MVR) in Germany. The present study examined the current opinions of active thoracic surgeons regarding minimum volumes (MV) for the surgical treatment of lung cancer.
methodsThe participating centers for the online survey were identified on the basis of the thoracic surgery departments in the 2017 hospital directory (Federal Statistical Office), lung cancer centers (German Cancer Society), certified centers of excellence for thoracic surgery (German Society for Thoracic Surgery), hospitals with a focus on lung surgery and German university hospitals. They were asked about the potential effects of MVR on the quality of results and quality of care, economic aspects and the structure of care. Furthermore, a recommendation for MV was requested and possible provisions for exemption were evaluated.
resultsA total of 145 hospitals (response rate 85%) with 454 thoracic surgeons (response rate 54%) were surveyed. The results showed a high degree of approval for MV to improve the quality of results and 78.4% of the surgeons surveyed expected it to result in centralization of surgical care, although this would not lead to a deterioration in care according to 70.1% of the participants. Approximately 46.1% of the participants expected care to become more economical and 83.3% supported the introduction of an MVR, with the average recommended MV being 67 anatomical lung resections per center per year.
conclusionAn MVR for the surgical treatment of lung cancer met with a high degree of approval among active thoracic surgeons. The MV that was called for (n = 67) was slightly below the prerequisite for primary surgical cases at a certified lung cancer center.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.