Search

Objective: This study simulates the regionalization of pancreatectomies to assess its impact on spatial access in terms of patient driving times., Background: Although policies to regionalize complex procedures to high-volume centers may improve outcomes, the impact on patient access is unknown., Methods: Patients who underwent pancreatectomies from 2005 to 2014 were identified from California's statewide database. Round-trip driving times between patients' home ZIP code and hospital addresses were calculated via Google Maps. Regionalization was simulated by eliminating hospitals performing <20 pancreatectomies/yr, and reassigning patients to the next closest hospital that satisfied the volume threshold. Sensitivity analyses were performed for New York and Medicare patients to assess for influence of geography and insurance coverage, respectively., Results: Of 13,317 pancreatectomies, 6335 (47.6%) were performed by hospitals with <20 cases/yr. Patients traveled a median of 49.8 minutes [interquartile range (IQR) 30.8-96.2] per round-trip. A volume-restriction policy would increase median round-trip driving time by 24.1 minutes (IQR 4.5-53.5). Population in-hospital mortality rates were estimated to decrease from 6.7% to 2.8% (P < 0.001). Affected patients were more likely to be racial minorities (44.6% vs 36.5% of unaffected group, P < 0.001) and covered by Medicaid or uninsured (16.3% vs 9.8% of unaffected group, P < 0.001). Sensitivity analyses revealed a 17.8 minutes increment for patients in NY (IQR 0.8-47.4), and 27.0 minutes increment for Medicare patients (IQR 6.2-57.1)., Conclusions: A policy that limits access to low-volume pancreatectomy hospitals will increase round-trip driving time by 24 minutes, but up to 54 minutes for 25% of patients. Population mortality rates may improve by 1.5%., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2019 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: General surgery residents are increasingly pursuing sub-specialty training in colorectal (CR) surgery. However, the majority of operations performed by CR surgeons are also performed by general surgeons. This study aimed to assess in-hospital mortality stratified by CR training status after adjusting for surgeon and hospital volume., Methods: The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative system database was used to identify all patients who underwent colectomy/proctectomy from January 1, 2000, to December 31, 2014, in the state of New York. Operations performed by board-certified CR surgeons were identified. The relationships between CR board certification and in-hospital mortality, in-hospital complications, length of stay, and ostomy were assessed using multivariate regression models., Results: Two hundred seventy thousand six hundred eighty-four patients underwent colectomy/proctectomy over the study period. Seventy-two thousand two hundred seventy-nine (26.7%) of operations were performed by CR surgeons. Without adjusting for hospital and surgeon volume, in-hospital mortality was lower for those undergoing colectomy/proctectomy by a CR surgeon (OR 0.49, CI 0.44-0.54, p = 0.001). After controlling for hospital and surgeon volume, the odds of inpatient mortality after colectomy/proctectomy for those operated on by CR surgeons weakened to 0.76 (CI 0.68-0.86, p = 0.001). Hospital and surgeon volume accounted for 53% of the reduction in in-hospital mortality when CR surgeons performed colectomy/proctectomy. Patients who underwent surgery by a CR surgeon had a shorter inpatient stay (0.8 days, p = 0.001) and a decreased chance of colostomy (OR 0.86, CI 0.78-0.95, p < 0.001)., Conclusions: For patients undergoing colectomy/proctectomy, in-hospital mortality decreased when the operation was performed by a CR surgeon even after accounting for hospital and surgeon volume.

Objective: To investigate the effect of subspecialty practice and experience on the relationship between annual volume and inpatient mortality after hepatic resection., Background: The impact of annual surgical volume on postoperative outcomes has been extensively examined. However, the impact of cumulative surgeon experience and specialty training on this relationship warrants investigation., Methods: The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System inpatient database was queried for patients' ≥18 years who underwent wedge hepatectomy or lobectomy from 2000 to 2014. Primary exposures included annual surgeon volume, surgeon experience (early vs late career), and surgical specialization-categorized as general surgery (GS), surgical oncology (SO), and transplant (TS). Primary endpoint was inpatient mortality. Hierarchical logistic regression was performed accounting for correlation at the level of the surgeon and the hospital, and adjusting for patient demographics, comorbidities, presence of cirrhosis, and annual surgical hospital volume., Results: A total of 13,467 cases were analyzed. Overall inpatient mortality was 2.35%. On unadjusted analysis, late career surgeons had a mortality rate of 2.62% versus 1.97% for early career surgeons. GS had a mortality rate of 2.98% compared with 1.68% for SO and 2.67% for TS. Once risk-adjusted, annual volume was associated with reduced mortality only among early-career surgeons (odds ratio 0.82, P = 0.001) and general surgeons (odds ratio 0.65, P = 0.002). No volume effect was seen among late-career or specialty-trained surgeons., Conclusions: Annual volume alone likely contributes only a partial assessment of the volume-outcome relationship. In patients undergoing hepatic resection, increased annual volume did not confer a mortality benefit on subspecialty surgeons or late career surgeons.