Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35219332›Full record

ArticleBMC health services research2022

Does hospital volume affect outcomes after abdominal cancer surgery: an analysis of Swiss health insurance claims data.

Kevin Wirth, Markus Näpflin, Sereina M Graber, Eva Blozik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC health services research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Kevin WirthHelsana Group, Department of Health Sciences, Zurich, Switzerland.
Markus NäpflinHelsana Group, Department of Health Sciences, Zurich, Switzerland.
Sereina M GraberHelsana Group, Department of Health Sciences, Zurich, Switzerland. sereina.graber@helsana.ch.
Eva BlozikHelsana Group, Department of Health Sciences, Zurich, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedical treatment quality has been shown to be better in high volume than in low volume hospitals. However, this relationship has not yet been confirmed in abdominal cancer in Switzerland and is relevant for referral of patients and healthcare planning. Thus, the present study investigates the association between hospital volumes for surgical resections of colon, gastric, rectal, and pancreatic carcinomas and outcomes.

methodsThis retrospective analysis is based on anonymized claims data of patients with mandatory health insurance at Helsana Group, a leading health insurance in Switzerland. Outcome parameters were length of hospital stay, mortality and cost during the inpatient stay as well as at 1-year follow-up. Hospital volume information was derived from the Quality Indicators dataset provided by the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health. The impact of hospital volume on the different treatment outcomes was statistically tested using generalized estimating equations (GEE) models, taking into account the non-independence of observations from the same hospital.

resultsThe studies included 2'859 resections in patients aged 18 years and older who were hospitalized for abdominal cancer surgery between 2014 and 2018. Colon resections were the most common procedures (n = 1'690), followed by rectal resections (n = 709). For rectal, colon and pancreatic resections, an increase in the mean number of interventions per hospital and a reduction of low volume hospitals could be observed. For the relationship between hospital volume and outcomes, we did not observe a clear dose-response relationship, as no significantly better outcomes were observed in the higher-volume category than in the lower-volume category. Even though a positive "routine effect" cannot be excluded, our results suggest that even hospitals with low volumes are able to achieve comparable treatment outcomes to larger hospitals.

conclusionIn summary, this study increases transparency on the relationship between hospital volume and treatment success. It shows that simple measures such as defining a minimum number of procedures only might not lead to the intended effects if other factors such as infrastructure, the operating team or aggregation level of the available data are not taken into account.

Indexed as

Hospitals, Low-VolumePancreatic NeoplasmsAdolescentHospital MortalityHumansInsurance, HealthRetrospective StudiesSwitzerlandAbdominal cancerHospital planningHospital volumeTreatment concentrationVolume-outcome

Identifiers

PMID35219332
PMCPMC8881861

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.