Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 3400 Spruce Street, 6 White Building, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
The Wharton School and Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
J Gastrointest Surg. 2018 Nov;22(11):1845-1851. doi: 10.1007/s11605-018-3849-z. Epub 2018 Jul 31.
With increasing focus on health care quality and cost containment, volume-based referral strategies have been proposed to improve value in high-cost procedures, such as esophagectomy. While the effect of hospital volume on outcomes has been demonstrated, our goal was to evaluate the economic consequences of volume-based referral practices for esophagectomy.
The nationwide inpatient sample (NIS) was queried for the years 2004-2013 for all patients undergoing esophagectomy. Patients were stratified by hospital volume quartile and substratified by preoperative risk and age. Clustered multivariable hierarchical logistic regression analysis was used to assess adjusted costs and mortality.
In total, 9270 patients were clustered based on annual hospital volume quartiles of < 7, 7 to 22, 23 to 87, and > 87 esophagectomies. After stratification by patient variables, high-volume centers performed esophagectomies in high-risk patients at the same cost as low-volume centers without significant difference in resource utilization. Overall, mortality decreased across volume quartiles (lowest 8.9 versus highest 3.6%, p < 0.0001). The greatest volume-mortality differences were observed among patients aged between 70 and 80 years (lowest 12.2 versus highest 6.2%, p = 0.009). Patients with high preoperative risk also derived mortality benefits with increasing hospital volume (lowest 17.5 versus highest 11.8%, p < 0.0001).
This study demonstrates that the mortality improvements for high-risk patients undergoing esophagectomy at high-volume centers do not come at increased costs. These results suggest that health systems should consider selectively referring high-risk patients to high-volume centers within their region.
随着对医疗保健质量和成本控制的关注度不断提高,已经提出了基于数量的转诊策略,以提高高成本手术(如食管癌切除术)的价值。虽然已经证明了医院数量对结果的影响,但我们的目标是评估基于数量的转诊实践对食管癌切除术的经济后果。
在 2004 年至 2013 年期间,通过全国住院患者样本(NIS)查询了所有接受食管癌切除术的患者。根据医院数量四分位数对患者进行分层,并按术前风险和年龄进行亚分层。使用聚类多变量分层逻辑回归分析评估调整后的成本和死亡率。
共有 9270 名患者根据每年<7、7-22、23-87 和>87 例食管癌切除术的医院数量四分位数聚类。根据患者变量分层后,高容量中心在与低容量中心相同的成本下为高危患者进行了食管癌切除术,且资源利用无显著差异。总体而言,死亡率随着数量四分位数的降低而降低(最低为 8.9%,最高为 3.6%,p<0.0001)。在 70 至 80 岁的患者中观察到最大的数量-死亡率差异(最低为 12.2%,最高为 6.2%,p=0.009)。术前风险较高的患者随着医院数量的增加也能获得死亡率降低的益处(最低为 17.5%,最高为 11.8%,p<0.0001)。
本研究表明,在高容量中心接受食管癌切除术的高危患者的死亡率改善并未导致成本增加。这些结果表明,卫生系统应考虑在其所在地区有选择地将高危患者转诊至高容量中心。