Nicholas H. Osborne

Trends in Hospital Volume and Operative Mortality for High-Risk Surgery

BACKGROUND There were numerous efforts in the United States during the previous decade to concentrate selected surgical procedures in high-volume hospitals. It remains unknown whether referral patterns for high-risk surgery have changed as a result and how operative mortality has been affected. METHODS We used national Medicare data to study patients undergoing one of eight different cancer and cardiovascular operations from 1999 through 2008. For each procedure, we examined trends in hospital volume and market concentration, defined as the proportion of Medicare patients undergoing surgery in the top decile of hospitals by volume per year. We used regression-based techniques to assess the effects of volume and market concentration on mortality over time, adjusting for case mix. RESULTS Median hospital volumes of four cancer resections (lung, esophagus, pancreas, and bladder) and of repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rose substantially. Depending on the procedure, higher hospital volumes were attributable to an increasing number of cases nationwide, an increasing market concentration, or both. Hospital volumes rose slightly for aortic-valve replacement but fell for coronary-artery bypass grafting and carotid endarterectomy. Operative mortality declined for all eight procedures, ranging from a relative decline of 8% for carotid endarterectomy (1.3% mortality in 1999 and 1.2% in 2008) to 36% for AAA repair (4.4% in 1999 and 2.8% in 2008). Higher hospital volumes explained a large portion of the decline in mortality for pancreatectomy (67% of the decline), cystectomy (37%), and esophagectomy (32%), but not for the other procedures. CONCLUSIONS Operative mortality with high-risk surgery fell substantially during the previous decade. Although increased market concentration and hospital volume have contributed to declining mortality with some high-risk cancer operations, declines in mortality with other procedures are largely attributable to other factors. (Funded by the National Institute on Aging.).

Hospital Characteristics Associated with Failure to Rescue from Complications after Pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND Failure to rescue (ie, mortality after a major complication) has recently been demonstrated as a mechanism underlying differences between high and low mortality hospitals. In this study, we sought to better understand the hospital characteristics that may explain failure to rescue. STUDY DESIGN Using data from the 2000 to 2006 Nationwide Inpatient Sample and the American Hospital Association annual survey, we evaluated the effect of 5 hospital level characteristics on failure to rescue (FTR) rates. Using multivariate logistic regression models, we determined the relative contribution of each of these factors to the FTR rates at the lowest and highest mortality hospitals. RESULTS Failure to rescue varied 6-fold across hospitals (6.4% in very low mortality hospitals vs 40.0% in very high mortality hospitals, p < 0.001). Several hospital characteristics were significantly associated with lower FTR: teaching status (odds ratio [OR] 0.66, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.82), hospital size greater than 200 beds (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.87), average daily census greater than 50% capacity (OR 0.56, 95%CI 0.32 to 0.98), increased nurse-to-patient ratios (OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.99), and high hospital technology (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.81). Including all hospital characteristics into a multivariate model results in a 36% reduction in the odds of FTR between very high and very low mortality hospitals (OR 6.6, 95% CI 3.7 to 11.9). CONCLUSIONS Several hospital characteristics are associated with FTR from major complications. However, a large portion of what makes some hospitals better than others at rescuing patients remains unexplained. Future research should focus on hospital cultures and attitudes that may contribute to the timely recognition and effective management of major complications.

Association of Hospital Participation in a Quality Reporting Program With Surgical Outcomes and Expenditures for Medicare Beneficiaries

IMPORTANCE The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) provides feedback to hospitals on risk-adjusted outcomes. It is not known if participation in the program improves outcomes and reduces costs relative to nonparticipating hospitals. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the association of enrollment and participation in the ACS NSQIP with outcomes and Medicare payments compared with control hospitals that did not participate in the program. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Quasi-experimental study using national Medicare data (2003-2012) for a total of 1,226,479 patients undergoing general and vascular surgery at 263 hospitals participating in ACS NSQIP and 526 nonparticipating hospitals. A difference-in-differences analytic approach was used to evaluate whether participation in ACS NSQIP was associated with improved outcomes and reduced Medicare payments compared with nonparticipating hospitals that were otherwise similar. Control hospitals were selected using propensity score matching (2 control hospitals for each ACS NSQIP hospital). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Thirty-day mortality, serious complications (eg, pneumonia, myocardial infarction, or acute renal failure and a length of stay >75th percentile), reoperation, and readmission within 30 days. Hospital costs were assessed using price-standardized Medicare payments during hospitalization and 30 days after discharge. RESULTS After accounting for patient factors and preexisting time trends toward improved outcomes, there were no statistically significant improvements in outcomes at 1, 2, or 3 years after (vs before) enrollment in ACS NSQIP. For example, in analyses comparing outcomes at 3 years after (vs before) enrollment, there were no statistically significant differences in risk-adjusted 30-day mortality (4.3% after enrollment vs 4.5% before enrollment; relative risk [RR], 0.96 [95% CI, 0.89 to 1.03]), serious complications (11.1% after enrollment vs 11.0% before enrollment; RR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.91 to 1.00]), reoperations (0.49% after enrollment vs 0.45% before enrollment; RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.16]), or readmissions (13.3% after enrollment vs 12.8% before enrollment; RR, 0.99 [95% CI, 0.96 to 1.03]). There were also no differences at 3 years after (vs before) enrollment in mean total Medicare payments (

Introduction to propensity scores: A case study on the comparative effectiveness of laparoscopic vs open appendectomy.

40 [95% CI, -

Hospital Process Compliance and Surgical Outcomes in Medicare Beneficiaries

268 to

Improving American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Risk Adjustment: Incorporation of a Novel Procedure Risk Score

348]), or payments for the index admission (-

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Access to Care and Survival for Patients With Early-Stage Hepatocellular Carcinoma

11 [95% CI, -

Explaining racial disparities in mortality after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair

278 to

Composite Measures for Rating Hospital Quality with Major Surgery

257]), hospital readmission (

Prophylactic Inferior Vena Cava Filter Placement Does Not Result in a Survival Benefit for Trauma Patients.

245 [95% CI, -