ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Clinical Outcomes, Costs, and Value of Surgery Among Older Patients with Colon Cancer at US News and World Report Ranked Versus Unranked Hospitals.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUS News and World Report (USNWR) hospital rankings influence patient choice of hospital, but their association with surgical outcomes remains ill-defined. We sought to characterize clinical outcomes and costs of surgery for colon cancer among USNWR top ranked and unranked hospitals.
methodsUsing Medicare Standard Analytic Files, patients aged ≥65 years undergoing surgery for colon cancer were identified. Hospitals were categorized as 'ranked' or 'unranked' based on USNWR cancer hospital rankings. One-to-one matching was performed between patients treated at ranked and unranked hospitals, and clinical outcomes and costs of surgery were compared.
resultsAmong 50 ranked and 2522 unranked hospitals, 13,650 patient pairs were compared. Overall, 30-day mortality was 2.13% in ranked hospitals versus 3.68% in unranked hospitals (p < 0.0001), and the overall paired cost difference was $8159 (p < 0.0001). As patient risk increased, 30-day mortality differences became larger, with the ranked hospitals having 30-day mortality of 7.59% versus 11.84% for unranked hospitals among the highest-risk patients (p < 0.0001). Overall paired cost differences also increased with increasing patient risk, with cost of care being $72,229 for ranked hospitals versus $56,512 for unranked hospitals among the highest-risk patients (difference = $14,394; p = 0.02). The difference in cost per 1% reduction in 30-day mortality was $9009 (95% confidence interval [CI] $6422-$11,597) for lowest-risk patients, which dropped to $3387 (95% CI $2656-$4119) for highest-risk patients (p < 0.0001).
conclusionTreatment at USNWR-ranked hospitals, particularly for higher-risk patients, was associated with better outcomes but higher-cost care. The benefit of being treated at highly ranked USNWR hospitals was most pronounced among high-risk patients.
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.