Top

Published in:

01-10-2005

The Volume–Outcome Relationship: Don’t Believe Everything You See

Authors: Caprice K. Christian, M.D., M.P.H., Michael L. Gustafson, M.D., M.B.A., Rebecca A. Betensky, Ph. D, Jennifer Daley, M.D., Michael J. Zinner, M.D.

Published in: World Journal of Surgery | Issue 10/2005

Abstract

This paper investigates methodological limitations of the volume–outcome relationship. A brief overview of quality measurement is followed by a discussion of two important aspects of the relationship.

Epstein AM. Volume and outcome—it is time to move ahead. N. Engl. J. Med. 2002;346:1161–1164PubMedCrossRef

Halm EA, Lee C, Chassin M. How Is Volume Related to Quality in Health Care? A Systematic Review of the Research Literature. Washington, DC, National Institute of Medicine, 2000

Dudley RA, Johansen KL, Brand R, et al. Selective referral to high-volume hospitals: estimating potentially avoidable deaths. J. A. M. A. 2000;283:1159–1166PubMed

http://www.leapfroggroup.org

Birkmeyer JD, Finlayson EV, Birkmeyer CM. Volume standards for high-risk surgical procedures: potential benefits of the Leapfrog initiative. Surgery 2001;130:415–422CrossRefPubMed

Birkmeyer JD. Should we regionalize major surgery? Potential benefits and policy considerations. J. Am. Coll. Surg. 2000;190:341–349CrossRefPubMed

Gordon TA, Bowman HM, Tielsch JM, et al. Statewide regionalization of pancreaticoduodenectomy and its effect on in-hospital mortality. Ann. Surg. 1998;228:71–78CrossRefPubMed

Russell TR. Invited commentary: Volume standards for high-risk operations: an American College of Surgeons’ view. Surgery 2001;130:423–424CrossRefPubMed

Dudley RA, Johansen KL. Invited commentary: physician responses to purchaser quality initiatives for surgical procedures. Surgery 2001;130:425–428CrossRefPubMed

10.

Khuri SF. Invited commentary: Surgeons, not General Motors, should set standards for surgical care. Surgery 2001;130:429–431CrossRefPubMed

11.

Daley J. Invited commentary: Quality of care and the volume–outcome relationship—what’s next for surgery? Surgery 2002;131:16–18CrossRefPubMed

12.

Luft HS, Hunt SS, Maerki SC. The volume–outcome relationship: practice-makes-perfect or selective referral patterns? Health Serv. Res. 1987;22:157–182PubMed

13.

Donabedian A. The quality of care: how can it be assessed? J. A. M. A. 1988;1988:1743–1748

14.

Donabedian A. Evaluating the quality of healthcare. Millbank Mem. Fund Q. 1966;44:S166–S206

15.

Jencks SF, Cuerdon T, Burwen DR, et al. Quality of medical care delivered to Medicare beneficiaries: a profile at state and national levels. J. A. M. A. 2000;284:1670–1676PubMed

16.

Palmer RH. Process-based measures of quality: the need for detailed clinical data in large health care databases. Ann. Intern. Med. 1997;127:733–738PubMed

17.

Palmer RH. Using health outcomes data to compare plans, networks, and providers. Int. J. Quality Healthcare 1998;10:477–483

18.

Khuri SF, Najjar SF, Daley J, et al. Comparison of surgical outcomes between teaching and nonteaching hospitals in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Ann. Surg. 2001;234:370–382;discussion 382–383CrossRefPubMed

19.

Elixhauser A, Steiner C, Fraser I. Volume thresholds and hospital characteristics in the United States. Health Aff (Millwood) 2003;22:167–177CrossRef

20.

Hannan EL, Popp AJ, Feustel P, et al. Association of surgical specialty and processes of care with patient outcomes for carotid endarterectomy. Stroke 2001;32:2890–2897PubMed

21.

Pitt HA, Murray KP, Bowman HM, et al. Clinical pathway implementation improves outcomes for complex biliary surgery. Surgery 1999;126:751–756;discussion 756–758CrossRefPubMed

22.

Pearson SD, Kleefield SF, Soukop JR, et al. Critical pathways intervention to reduce length of hospital stay. Am. J. Med. 2001;110:175–180CrossRefPubMed

23.

Sesperez J, Wilson S, Jalaludin B, et al. Trauma case management and clinical pathways: prospective evaluation of their effect on selected patient outcomes in five key trauma conditions. J. Trauma 2001;50:643–639PubMed

24.

Kim MH, Rachwal W, McHale C, et al. Effect of amiodarone +/− diltiazem +/− beta blocker on frequency of atrial fibrillation, length of hospitalization, and hospital costs after coronary artery bypass grafting. Am. J. Cardiol. 2002;89:1126–1128CrossRefPubMed

25.

O’Connor GT, Plume SK, Olmstead EM, et al. A regional intervention to improve the hospital mortality associated with coronary artery bypass graft surgery. The Northern New England Cardiovascular Disease Study Group. J. A. M. A. 1996;275:841–846PubMed

26.

Khuri SF, Daley J, Henderson W, et al. The Department of Veterans Affairs’ NSQIP: the first national, validated, outcome-based, risk-adjusted, and peer-controlled program for the measurement and enhancement of the quality of surgical care. National VA Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Ann. Surg. 1998;228:491–507CrossRefPubMed

27.

Daley J, Henderson WG, Khuri SF. Risk-adjusted surgical outcomes. Ann. Rev. Med. 2001;52:275–287CrossRefPubMed

28.

Hannan EL, Radzyner M, Rubin D, et al. The influence of hospital and surgeon volume on in-hospital mortality for colectomy, gastrectomy, and lung lobectomy in patients with cancer. Surgery 2002;131:6–15CrossRefPubMed

29.

Cebul RD, Snow RJ, Pine R, et al. Indications, outcomes, and provider volumes for carotid endarterectomy. J. A. M. A. 1998;279:1282–1287PubMed

30.

Hannan EL, O’Donnell JF, Kilburn H Jr., et al. Investigation of the relationship between volume and mortality for surgical procedures performed in New York State hospitals. J. A. M. A. 1989;262:503–510PubMedCrossRef

31.

Hannan EL, Popp AJ, Tranmer B, et al. Relationship between provider volume and mortality for carotid endarterectomies in New York State. Stroke 1998;29:2292–2297PubMed

32.

Munoz E, Mulloy K, Goldstein J, et al. Costs, quality, and the volume of surgical oncology procedures. Arch. Surg. 1990;125:360–363PubMed

33.

Christian CK, Gustafson ML, Betensky RA, et al. The leapfrog volume criteria may fall short in identifying high quality surgical centers. Ann. Surg. 2003;238:447–455PubMed

34.

http://www.uhc.edu.

Title: The Volume–Outcome Relationship: Don’t Believe Everything You See
Authors: Caprice K. Christian, M.D., M.P.H.
Michael L. Gustafson, M.D., M.B.A.
Rebecca A. Betensky, Ph. D
Jennifer Daley, M.D.
Michael J. Zinner, M.D.
Publication date: 01-10-2005
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: World Journal of Surgery / Issue 10/2005
Print ISSN: 0364-2313
Electronic ISSN: 1432-2323
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7993-8

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The Volume–Outcome Relationship: Don’t Believe Everything You See

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 10/2005

Intraoperative Parathyroid Hormone Assay in Patients with Graves’ Disease for Prediction of Postoperative Tetany

Early Prediction of Normocalcemia after Thyroid Surgery

Prospectively Randomized Trial Using Perioperative Low-dose Octreotide to Prevent Organ-related and General Complications after Pancreatic Surgery and Pancreatico-jejunostomy

Quality in Surgery: Current Issues for the Future

Fatal Chest Injury with Lung Evisceration during Athletic Games in Ancient Greece

A New Knot Technique for Vessel Ligatures