Procedural Volume as a Marker of Quality for CABG Surgery
- 14 January 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in JAMA
- Vol. 291 (2), 195-201
- https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.291.2.195
Abstract
Research from JAMA — Procedural Volume as a Marker of Quality for CABG Surgery — ContextThere have been recent calls for using hospital procedural volume as a quality indicator for coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery, but further research into analysis and policy implication is needed before hospital procedural volume is accepted as a standard quality metric.ObjectiveTo examine the contemporary association between hospital CABG procedure volume and outcome in a large national clinical database.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsObservational analysis of 267 089 isolated CABG procedures performed at 439 US hospitals participating in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons National Cardiac Database between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2001.Main Outcome MeasureAssociation between hospital CABG procedural volume and all-cause operative mortality (in-hospital or 30-day, whichever was longer).ResultsThe median (interquartile range) annual hospital-isolated CABG volume was 253 (165-417) procedures, with 82% of centers performing fewer than 500 procedures per year. The overall operative mortality was 2.66%. After adjusting for patient risk and clustering effects, rates of operative mortality decreased with increasing hospital CABG volume (0.07% for every 100 additional CABG procedures; adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.96-0.99; P = .004). While the association between volume and outcome was statistically significant overall, this association was not observed in patients younger than 65 years or in those at low operative risk and was confounded by surgeon volume. The ability of hospital volume to discriminate those centers with significantly better or worse mortality was limited due to the wide variability in risk-adjusted mortality among hospitals with similar volume. Closure of up to 100 of the lowest-volume centers (ie, those performing ≤150 CABG procedures/year) was estimated to avert fewer than 50 of 7110 (<1% of total) CABG-related deaths.ConclusionIn contemporary practice, hospital procedural volume is only modestly associated with CABG outcomes and therefore may not be an adequate quality metric for CABG surgery.Keywords
This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- Do Hospitals and Surgeons With Higher Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery Volumes Still Have Lower Risk-Adjusted Mortality Rates?Circulation, 2003
- Should Volume Standards for Cardiovascular Surgery Focus Only on High-Risk Patients?Circulation, 2003
- Hospital Volume and Surgical Mortality in the United StatesNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- The role of hospital volume in coronary artery bypass grafting: is more always better?11>Presented, in part, at the Annual Meeting of the American Heart Association in New Orleans, Louisiana, on November 13, 2000.Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2001
- Outcome as a function of annual coronary artery bypass graft volumeThe Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 1996
- Regionalization of cardiac surgery in the United States and Canada. Geographic access, choice, and outcomesPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1995
- The decline in coronary artery bypass graft surgery mortality in New York State. The role of surgeon volumeJAMA, 1995
- Effects of Surgeon Volume and Hospital Volume on Quality of Care in HospitalsMedical Care, 1987
- Association of volume with outcome of coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Scheduled vs nonscheduled operationsJAMA, 1987
- Should Operations Be Regionalized? The Empirical Relation between Surgical Volume and MortalitySurvey of Anesthesiology, 1980