High-Volume versus Low-Volume for Esophageal Resections for Cancer: The Essential Role of Case-Mix Adjustments based on Clinical Data

Background: Most studies addressing the volume-outcome relationship in complex surgical procedures use hospital mortality as the sole outcome measure and are rarely based on detailed clinical data. The lack of reliable information about comorbidities and tumor stages makes the conclusions of these studies debatable. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes for esophageal resections for cancer in low- versus high-volume hospitals, using an extensive set of variables concerning case-mix and outcome measures, including long-term survival. Methods: Clinical data, from 903 esophageal resections performed between January 1990 and December 1999, were retrieved from the original patients' files. Three hundred and forty-two patients were operated on in 11 low-volume hospitals (<7 resections/year) and 561 in a single high-volume center. Results: Mortality and morbidity rates were significantly lower in the high-volume center, which had an in-hospital mortality of 5 vs 13% (P < .001). On multivariate analysis, hospital volume, but also the presence of comorbidity proved to be strong prognostic factors predicting in-hospital mortality (ORs 3.05 and 2.34). For stage I and II disease, there was a significantly better 5-year survival in the high-volume center. (P = .04). Conclusions: Hospital volume and comorbidity patterns are important determinants of outcome in esophageal cancer surgery. Strong clinical endpoints such as in-hospital mortality and survival can be used as performance indicators, only if they are joined by reliable case-mix information

Outcome and quality of life after aorto-bifemoral bypass surgery

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Aorto-bifemoral bypass (AFB) is commonly performed to treat aorto-iliac disease and a durable long-term outcome is achieved. Most studies documenting beneficial outcomes after AFB have been limited to mortality and morbidity rates, costs and length of hospital stay (LOS). Few studies have examined the dependency of patients and how their perception of their own health changes after surgery. The aim of the present study was to evaluate outcome after AFB and to study its determinants.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>This retrospective study was carried out in the multidisciplinary Post-Anaesthesia Care Unit (PACU) with five intensive care beds. Out of 1597 intensive care patients admitted to the PACU, 75 were submitted to infrarenal AFB and admitted to these intensive care unit (ICU) beds over 2 years. Preoperative characteristics and outcome were evaluated by comparing occlusive disease with aneurysmatic disease patients. Six months after discharge, the patients were contacted to complete a Short Form-36 questionnaire (SF-36) and to have their dependency in Activities of Daily Living (ADL) evaluated. Patient's characteristics and postoperative follow-up data were compared using Mann-Whitney U test, t test for independent groups, chi-square or Fisher's exact test. Patient preoperative characteristics were evaluated for associations with mortality using a multiple logistic regression analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The mortality rate was 12% at six months. Multivariate analysis identified congestive heart disease and APACHE II as independent determinants for mortality. Patients submitted to AFB for occlusive disease had worse SF-36 scores in role physical and general health perception. Patients submitted to AFB had worse SF-36 scores for all domains than a comparable urban population and had similar scores to other PACU patients. Sixty-six percent and 23% of patients were dependent in at least one activity in instrumental and personal ADL, respectively, but 64% reported having better general health.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study shows that congestive heart disease and APACHE II were risk factors for mortality after AFB surgery. Survivors who have undergone AFB perceive an improved quality of life although they are more dependent in ADL tasks and have worse scores in almost all SF-36 than the population to which they belong.</p

Patient satisfaction with quality of primary health care in Benghazi, Libya

Introduction: The Libyan National Health System (LNHS) is debated for the paradox of its performance versus impact. It has poor performance, but the national health statistics are good and competitive. There are concerted efforts to manage health care services and to regain the lost trust. A primary health care (PHC) system that focuses on preventive and promotive care is the core focus of LNHS efforts. Objectives: To assess patient satisfaction with quality of PHC assessed in terms of (a) customer profile, (b) patient satisfaction, and (c) health care-seeking behavior. Methodology: A sample of nine health centers and seven polyclinics from various locations in Benghazi, Libya were selected for gathering information by structured face-to-face interviews. A total of 310 beneficiaries were interviewed by using an Arabic translation of the Charleston Psychiatric Outpatient Satisfaction Scale. Results: The beneficiaries appear to be quite satisfied with the quality of services. Geographical zone, marital status of beneficiary, and type of facility are satisfaction-related factors. There are preferences for facilities located within the City Centre over those located elsewhere. There is also an interaction effect of the geographical zone and the type of facility in creating differences in satisfaction. Conclusions: A customer-friendly facility concept that emphasizes reception, physician interaction, and cordiality shall add value. Polyclinics require more attention as does the Al Slawy area. A few utility services might also be considered

Centralization of Esophageal Cancer Surgery: Does It Improve Clinical Outcome?

Background: The volume-outcome relationship for complex surgical procedures has been extensively studied. Most studies are based on administrative data and use in-hospital mortality as the sole outcome measure. It is still unknown if concentration of these procedures leads to improvement of clinical outcome. The aim of our study was to audit the process and effect of centralizing oesophageal resections for cancer by using detailed clinical data. Methods: From January 1990 until December 2004, 555 esophagectomies for cancer were performed in 11 hospitals in the region of the Comprehensive Cancer Center West (CCCW); 342 patients were operated on before and 213 patients after the introduction of a centralization project. In this project patients were referred to the hospitals which showed superior outcomes in a regional audit. In this audit patient, tumor, and operative details as well as clinical outcome were compared between hospitals. The outcome of both cohorts, patients operated on before and after the start of the project, were evaluated. Results: Despite the more severe comorbidity of the patient group, outcome improved after centralizing esophageal resections. Along with a reduction in postoperative morbidity and length of stay, mortality fell from 12% to 4% and survival improved significantly (P = 0.001). The hospitals with the highest procedural volume showed the biggest improvement in outcome. Conclusion: Volume is an important determinant of quality of care in esophageal cancer surgery. Referral of patients with esophageal cancer to surgical units with adequate experience and superior outcomes (outcome-based referral) improves quality of care

Impact of socio-economic deprivation on death rates after surgery for upper gastrointestinal tract cancer

We hypothesised that socio-economic deprivation in England may be a prognostic factor for death after oesophagectomy or gastrectomy for cancer of the upper gastrointestinal tract. We analysed statistical data from hospital records linked to death records for patients who underwent operations for oesophageal and gastric cancer in England from April 1998 to March 2002. The patients were stratified into quintiles according to the index of multiple deprivation (IMD) (2000) for their place (ward) of residence. Age and sex standardised death rates at 30 and 90 days for each deprivation quintile were calculated. Following oesophagectomy, death rates showed a significant association with IMD. They increased with increasing levels of deprivation: the odds ratio for death, comparing highest with lowest quintile for deprivation, was 1.37 (95% confidence interval 1.03–1.85) at 30 days and 1.30 (1.04–1.64) at 90 days. Following gastrectomy, the death rates showed smaller and nonsignificant associations with IMD with odds ratios of 1.16 (0.84–1.62) and 1.10 (0.86–1.41), respectively. There is a significant association between social deprivation and death after oesophagectomy, but less of an association, if any, after gastrectomy in current UK practice

Quality of Care in Humanitarian Surgery

Humanitarian surgical programs are set up de novo, within days or hours in emergency or disaster settings. In such circumstances, insuring quality of care is extremely challenging. Basic structural inputs such as a safe structure, electricity, clean water, a blood bank, sterilization equipment, a post-anesthesia recovery unit, appropriate medications should be established. Currently, no specific credentials are needed for surgeons to operate in a humanitarian setting; the training of more humanitarian surgeons is desperately needed. Standard perioperative protocols for the humanitarian setting after common procedures such as Cesarean section, burn care, open fractures, and amputations and antibiotic prophylaxis, and post-operative pain management must be developed. Outcome data, especially long-term outcomes, are difficult to collect as patients often do not return for follow-up and may be difficult to trace; standard databases for post-operative infections and mortality rates should be established. Checklists have recently received significant attention as an instrument to support the improvement of surgical quality; knowing which items are most applicable to humanitarian settings remains unknown. In conclusion, the quality of surgical services in humanitarian settings must be regulated. Many other core medical activities of humanitarian organizations such as therapeutic feeding, mass vaccination, and the treatment of infectious diseases, such as tuberculosis and human immunodeficiency virus, are subject to rigorous reporting of quality indicators. There is no reason why surgery should be exempted from quality oversight. The surgical humanitarian community should pull together before the next disaster strikes

The impact of open versus closed format ICU admission practices on the outcome of high risk surgical patients: a cohort analysis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In the year 2000, the organizational structure of the ICU in the Zaandam Medical Centre (ZMC) changed from an open to a closed format ICU. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of this organizational change on outcome in high risk surgical patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The medical records of all consecutive high risk surgical patients admitted to the ICU from 1996 to 1998 (open format) and from 2003 to 2005 (closed format), were reviewed. High-risk patients were defined according to the Identification of Risk in Surgical patients (IRIS) score. Parameters studied were: mortality, morbidity, ICU length of stay (LOS) and hospital LOS.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Mortality of ICU patients was 25.7% in the open format group and 15.8% in the closed format group (p = 0.01). Morbidity decreased from 48.6% to 46.1% (p = 0.6). The average length of hospital stay was 17 days in the open format group, and 21 days in the closed format group (p = 0.03).</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>High risk surgical patients in the ICU are patients that have undergone complex and often extensive surgery. These patients are in need of specialized treatment and careful monitoring for maximum safety and optimal care. Our results suggest that closed format is a more favourable setting than open format to minimize the effects of high risk surgery, and to warrant safe outcome in this patient group.</p