British Journal of Medical & Surgical Urology
Volume 1, Issue 2 , Pages 50-57 , September 2008

Volume–outcome relationship in surgical urology: Myth or reality?

  • Erik K. Mayer

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, St Mary's Hospital, Praed Street, London W2 1NY, United Kingdom
    • Department of Biosurgery & Surgical Technology, Imperial College London, 10th Floor, QEQM Building, St Mary's Hospital Campus, Praed Street, London W2 1NY, United Kingdom
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author at: Department of Biosurgery & Surgical Technology, Imperial College London, 10th Floor, QEQM Building, St Mary's Hospital Campus, Praed Street, London W2 1NY, United Kingdom. Tel.: +44 207 886 1947; fax: +44 207 886 1546.
    • ,
  • Alex Bottle

      Affiliations

    • Division of Epidemiology, Public Health and Primary Care, Imperial College London, 12 Smithfield Street, London EC1A 9LA, United Kingdom
    • ,
  • Thanos Athanasiou

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biosurgery & Surgical Technology, Imperial College London, 10th Floor, QEQM Building, St Mary's Hospital Campus, Praed Street, London W2 1NY, United Kingdom
    • ,
  • Ara W. Darzi

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biosurgery & Surgical Technology, Imperial College London, 10th Floor, QEQM Building, St Mary's Hospital Campus, Praed Street, London W2 1NY, United Kingdom
    • ,
  • Justin A. Vale

      Affiliations

    • Department of Urology, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, St Mary's Hospital, Praed Street, London W2 1NY, United Kingdom

Received 30 May 2008 ,Revised 12 June 2008 ,Accepted 25 June 2008.

References 

  1. Luft HS, Bunker JP, Enthoven AC. Should operations be regionalized? The empirical relation between surgical volume and mortality. N Engl J Med. 1979;301:1364–1369
  2. Improving outcomes guidance. Available from http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Policyandguidance/Healthandsocialcaretopics/Cancer/DH_4063775.
  3. Christian CK, Gustafson ML, Betensky RA, Daley J, Zinner MJ. The volume–outcome relationship: don’t believe everything you see. World J Surg. 2005;29:1241–1244
  4. Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin MR. Is volume related to outcome in health care? A systematic review and methodologic critique of the literature. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:511–520
  5. Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of medical care. Milbank Memorial Fund Quart. 1966;44:166–203
  6. Hewitt M . Interpreting the volume–outcome relationship in the context of health care quality: workshop summary. Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC: National Academic Press; 2000;
  7. Halm E, Lee C, Chassin M . How is volume related to quality in health care? A systematic review of the research literature. Interpreting the volume–outcome relationship in the context of health care quality: workshop summary. Institute of Medicine, Washington, DC: National Academic Press; 2000;
  8. Killeen SD, O'Sullivan MJ, Coffey JC, Kirwan WO, Redmond HP. Provider volume and outcomes for oncological procedures. Br J Surg. 2005;92:389–402
  9. Panageas KS, Schrag D, Riedel E, Bach PB, Begg CB. The effect of clustering of outcomes on the association of procedure volume and surgical outcomes. Ann Intern Med. 2003;139:658–665
  10. Ellison LM, Trock BJ, Poe NR, Partin AW. The effect of hospital volume on cancer control after radical prostatectomy. J Urol. 2005;173:2094–2098
  11. Audit Commission. Information and data quality in the NHS. Key messages from three years of independent review. 2004. Available from www.auditcommission.gov.uk/reports/NATIONAL-REPORT.asp?CategoryID=&ProdID=4D598AF6-3894-401d-AA48-1076125DA38D&SectionID=toc#.
  12. Aylin P, Bottle A, Majeed A. Use of administrative data or clinical databases as predictors of risk of death in hospital: comparison of models. BMJ. 2007;334:1044
  13. Birkmeyer JD, Stukel TA, Siewers AE, Goodney PP, Wennberg DE, Lucas FL. Surgeon volume and operative mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:2117–2127
  14. Schrag D, Panageas KS, Riedel E, Cramer LD, Guillem JG, Bach PB, et al. Hospital and surgeon procedure volume as predictors of outcome following rectal cancer resection. Ann Surg. 2002;236:583–592
  15. Schrag D, Panageas KS, Riedel E, Hsieh L, Bach PB, Guillem JG, et al. Surgeon volume compared to hospital volume as a predictor of outcome following primary colon cancer resection. J Surg Oncol. 2003;83:68–78[discussion 78–9]
  16. Begg CB, Riedel ER, Bach PB, Kattan MW, Schrag D, Warren JL, et al. Variations in morbidity after radical prostatectomy. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1138–1144
  17. Bianco FJ, Riedel ER, Begg CB, Kattan MW, Scardino PT. Variations among high volume surgeons in the rate of complications after radical prostatectomy: further evidence that technique matters. J Urol. 2005;173:2099–2103
  18. Mason A, Goldacre MJ, Bettley G, Vale J, Joyce A. Using routine data to define clinical case-mix and compare hospital outcomes in urology. BJU Int. 2006;97:1145–1147
  19. Konety BR, Dhawan V, Allareddy V, Joslyn SA. Impact of hospital and surgeon volume on in-hospital mortality from radical cystectomy: data from the health care utilization project. J Urol. 2005;173:1695–1700
  20. McCabe JE, Jibawi A, Javle P. Defining the minimum hospital case-load to achieve optimum outcomes in radical cystectomy. BJU Int. 2005;96:806–810
  21. Hollenbeck BK, Wei Y, Birkmeyer JD. Volume, process of care, and operative mortality for cystectomy for bladder cancer. Urology. 2007;69:871–875
  22. Elting LS, Pettaway C, Bekele BN, Grossman HB, Cooksley C, Avritscher EB, et al. Correlation between annual volume of cystectomy, professional staffing, and outcomes: a statewide, population-based study. Cancer. 2005;104:975–984
  23. Nelson CP, Dunn RL, Wei JT, Gearhart JP. Surgical repair of bladder exstrophy in the modern era: contemporary practice patterns and the role of hospital case volume. J Urol. 2005;174:1099–1102
  24. Eastham JA, Kattan MW, Riedel E, Begg CB, Wheeler TM, Gerigk C, et al. Variations among individual surgeons in the rate of positive surgical margins in radical prostatectomy specimens. J Urol. 2003;170:2292–2295
  25. Yao SL, Lu-Yao G. Population-based study of relationships between hospital volume of prostatectomies, patient outcomes, and length of hospital stay. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91:1950–1956
  26. Hu JC, Gold KF, Pashos CL, Mehta SS, Litwin MS. Role of surgeon volume in radical prostatectomy outcomes. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:401–405
  27. Davenport K, Timoney AG, Keeley FX, Joyce A, Downey P. A 3-year review of The British Association of Urological Surgeons Section of endourology laparoscopic nephrectomy audit. BJU Int. 2006;97:333–337
  28. Taub DA, Miller DC, Cowan JA, Dimick JB, Montie JE, Wei JT. Impact of surgical volume on mortality and length of stay after nephrectomy. Urology. 2004;63:862–867
  29. Goodney PP, Stukel TA, Lucas FL, Finlayson EV, Birkmeyer JD. Hospital volume, length of stay, and readmission rates in high-risk surgery. Ann Surg. 2003;238:161–167
  30. Konety BR, Allareddy V, Modak S, Smith B. Mortality after major surgery for urologic cancers in specialized urology hospitals: are they any better?. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2006–2012
  31. Thorpe AC, Cleary R, Coles J, Vernon S, Reynolds J, Neal DE. Deaths and complications following prostatectomy in 1400 men in the northern region of England. Northern Regional Prostate Audit Group. Br J Urol. 1994;74:559–565
  32. Hillner BE, Smith TJ, Desch CE. Hospital and physician volume or specialization and outcomes in cancer treatment: importance in quality of cancer care. J Clin Oncol. 2000;18:2327–2340
  33. Konety BR, Allareddy V, Herr H. Complications after radical cystectomy: analysis of population-based data. Urology. 2006;68:58–64
  34. Chun FK, Briganti A, Antebi E, Graefen M, Currlin E, Steuber T, et al. Surgical volume is related to the rate of positive surgical margins at radical prostatectomy in European patients. BJU Int. 2006;98:1204–1209
  35. Hollenbeck BK, Daignault S, Dunn RL, Gilbert S, Weizer AZ, Miller DC. Getting under the hood of the volume–outcome relationship for radical cystectomy. J Urol. 2007;177:2095–2099[discussion 2099]
  36. Judge A, Evans S, Gunnell DJ, Albertsen PC, Verne J, Martin RM. Patient outcomes and length of hospital stay after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer: analysis of hospital episodes statistics for England. BJU Int. 2007;100:1040–1049
  37. The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. STS National Database. 2007. Available from http://www.sts.org/sections/stsnationaldatabase/.
  38. The Leapfrog Group. Evidence-based hospital referral. 2004. Available at http://www.leapfroggroup.org.
  39. Barbieri CE, Lee B, Cookson MS, Bingham J, Clark PE, Smith JA, et al. Association of procedure volume with radical cystectomy outcomes in a nationwide database. J Urol. 2007;178:1418–1421[discussion 1421–2]
  40. Gilbert SM, Dunn RL, Miller DC, Daignault S, Ye Z, Hollenbeck BK. Mortality after urologic cancer surgery: impact of non-index case volume. Urology. 2008;71:906–910
  41. Klein EA, Bianco FJ, Serio AM, Eastham JA, Kattan MW, Pontes JE, et al. Surgeon experience is strongly associated with biochemical recurrence after radical prostatectomy for all preoperative risk categories. J Urol. 2008;
  42. Hollenbeck BK, Dunn RL, Miller DC, Daignault S, Taub DA, Wei JT. Volume-based referral for cancer surgery: informing the debate. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:91–96
  43. Hong D, Tandan VR, Goldsmith CH, Simunovic M. Users’ guide to the surgical literature: how to use an article reporting population-based volume–outcome relationships in surgery. Can J Surg. 2002;45:109–115

PII: S1875-9742(08)00061-X

doi: 10.1016/j.bjmsu.2008.06.004

British Journal of Medical & Surgical Urology
Volume 1, Issue 2 , Pages 50-57 , September 2008

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution