Why the study?
Does high physician and hospital volume improve outcomes in inpatients undergoing endovascular repair of aortoiliac occlusive disease?
Does high physician and hospital volume improve outcomes in inpatients undergoing endovascular repair of aortoiliac occlusive disease?
Higher physician and hospital volumes are associated with better clinical and economic outcomes for endovascular treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
High-volume endovascular aortoiliac repair may reduce complications and costs; leaves open whether volume-based referral improves outcomes prospectively.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of physician volume and specialty and hospital volume on population-level outcomes after endovascular repair of aortoiliac occlusive disease (AIOD). DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis of all inpatients undergoing endovascular repair of AIOD. Physician volume was classified as low (<17 procedures per year [<50th percentile]) or high (≥17 procedures per year). Physicians were defined as surgeons if they performed at least 1 carotid, aortic, or iliac endarterectomy; open aortic repair; above- or below-knee amputation; or aortoiliac-femoral bypass. Hospital volume was low (<116 procedures per year [<50th percentile]) or high (≥116 procedures per year). PATIENTS: Eight hundred eighteen inpatients who underwent endovascular repair of AIOD in the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project Nationwide Inpatient Sample from January 2003 through December 2007. SETTING: National hospital database. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: In-hospital complications and mortality, length of stay, and cost. RESULTS: Of the 818 procedures, 59.0% of high-volume physicians were surgeons and 65.0% practiced at high-volume hospitals. Unadjusted complication rates were significantly higher for low-volume compared with high-volume physicians (18.7% vs 12.6%; P = .02); rates were not significantly different by physician specialty (P = .88) or hospital volume (P = .16). Shorter length of stay was associated with high-volume physicians (P = .001), high-volume hospitals (P = .001), and surgeon providers (P = .03), whereas decreased cost was associated with physician specialty (P = .004). On multivariate analysis, high physician volume was associated with significantly lower complications (P = .04); high hospital volume, with shorter length of stay (P = .002); and nonsurgeons, with higher costs (P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, volume at the physician and hospital levels appears to be a robust predictor of patient outcomes after endovascular interventions for AIOD. Surgeons performing endovascular procedures for AIOD have a decreased associated hospital cost compared with nonsurgeons.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jeffrey Indes (2011) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: