Center for Health Policy and Outcomes, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Biostatistics Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Cancer Med. 2020 Mar;9(5):1648-1660. doi: 10.1002/cam4.2800. Epub 2020 Jan 9.
While public reporting of surgical outcomes for noncancer conditions is common, cancer surgeries have generally been excluded. This is true despite numerous studies showing outcomes to differ between hospitals based on their characteristics. Our objective was to assess whether three prerequisites for quality assessment and reporting are present for 30-day mortality after cancer surgery: low burden for timely reporting, hospital variation, and potential for public health gains.
We used Fee-for-Service (FFS) Medicare claims to examine the extent of variation in 30-day cancer surgical mortality between 3860 US hospitals. We included 340 489 surgeries for 12 cancer types for FFS Medicare beneficiaries aged ≥66 years, 2011-2013. Hierarchical mixed-effects logistic regression models adjusted for patient and hospital characteristics and with a random hospital effect were fit to obtain hospital-specific risk-standardized mortality rates (RSMRs) and 99% confidence intervals (CI). We calculated a hospital odds ratio to describe the difference in mortality risk for a hospital above vs below average quality and estimated the potential mortality reduction.
The median number of cancer surgeries per hospital was 34. The median RSMR overall was 2.41% (99% CI 2.28%, 2.66%). In aggregate and for most cancers, variation between hospitals exceeded that due to differences in patient and hospital characteristics. For individual cancers, relative differences exceeded 20% in mortality risk between patients undergoing surgery at a hospital below vs above average quality, with the potential for an estimated 500 deaths prevented annually given hypothetical improvements.
Quality measurement and reporting of 30-day mortality for cancer surgery is worthy of consideration.
虽然常见的是对非癌症病症的手术结果进行公开报告,但癌症手术通常被排除在外。尽管有大量研究表明,医院的特征不同会导致手术结果存在差异,但这一情况依然存在。我们的目的是评估在癌症手术后 30 天死亡率方面,质量评估和报告的三个前提条件是否存在:及时报告的负担低、医院间存在差异以及对公共卫生有潜在收益。
我们使用按服务收费(FFS)医疗保险索赔来检查 3860 家美国医院之间 30 天癌症手术死亡率的差异程度。我们纳入了 FFS 医疗保险受益人的 12 种癌症类型的 340489 例手术,年龄≥66 岁,时间范围为 2011-2013 年。使用分层混合效应逻辑回归模型,根据患者和医院特征进行调整,并包含随机医院效应,以获得医院特异性风险标准化死亡率(RSMR)及其 99%置信区间(CI)。我们计算了医院比值比,以描述医院质量高于或低于平均水平的死亡率风险差异,并估计了潜在的死亡率降低。
每家医院的癌症手术中位数为 34 例。总体中位数 RSMR 为 2.41%(99%CI 2.28%,2.66%)。在总体和大多数癌症中,医院间的差异大于患者和医院特征差异导致的差异。对于个别癌症,手术质量低于或高于平均水平的患者之间的死亡率风险差异超过 20%,假设有所改善,每年可预防约 500 例死亡。
癌症手术 30 天死亡率的质量测量和报告值得考虑。