Effect of hospital caseload on long-term outcome after standardization of rectal cancer surgery at a national level
- 6 December 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in British Journal of Surgery
- Vol. 92 (2) , 217-224
- https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.4821
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this prospective study was to examine the influence of hospital caseload on long‐term outcome following standardization of rectal cancer surgery at a national level. Methods: Data relating to all 3388 Norwegian patients with rectal cancer treated for cure between November 1993 and December 1999 were recorded in a national database. Treating hospitals were divided into four groups according to their annual caseload: hospitals in group 1 (n = 4) carried out 30 or more procedures, those in group 2 (n = 6) performed 20–29 procedures, group 3 (n = 16) 10–19 procedures and group 4 (n = 28) fewer than ten procedures. Results: The 5‐year local recurrence rates were 9·2, 14·7, 12·5 and 17·5 per cent (P = 0·003) and 5‐year overall survival rates were 64·4, 64·0, 60·8 and 57·8 per cent (P = 0·105) respectively in the four hospital caseload groups. An annual hospital caseload of less than ten procedures increased the risk of local recurrence compared with that in hospitals where 30 or more procedures were performed each year (hazard ratio 1·9 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 1·3 to 2·7); P < 0·001). Overall survival was lower for patients treated at hospitals with an annual caseload of less than ten versus hospitals with 30 or more (hazard ratio 1·2 (95 per cent c.i. 1·0 to 1·5); P = 0·023). Conclusion: The rate of local recurrence was higher for hospitals with a low annual caseload of less than ten procedures than for hospitals with a high treatment volume of 30 or more. Patients treated in small hospitals also had a shorter long‐term survival than those treated in large hospitals. Copyright © 2004 British Journal of Surgery Society Ltd. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Keywords
Funding Information
- Norwegian Cancer Society
This publication has 17 references indexed in Scilit:
- Oncological Outcomes After Total Mesorectal Excision for Cure for Cancer of the Lower Rectum: Anterior vs. Abdominoperineal ResectionDiseases of the Colon & Rectum, 2004
- The surgeon as a prognostic factor after the introduction of total mesorectal excision in the treatment of rectal cancerBritish Journal of Surgery, 2002
- Experience of surgery for rectal cancer with total mesorectal excision in a general surgical practiceBritish Journal of Surgery, 2002
- Adjuvant therapy for rectal cancer cannot be based on the results of other surgeonsBritish Journal of Surgery, 2002
- Prognostic significance of the circumferential resection margin following total mesorectal excision for rectal cancerBritish Journal of Surgery, 2002
- Hospital caseload and the results achieved in patients with rectal cancerBritish Journal of Surgery, 2001
- Reduction of postoperative morbidity and mortality in patients with rectal cancer following the introduction of a colorectal unitBritish Journal of Surgery, 2001
- ABC of colorectal cancer: Primary treatment---does the surgeon matter?BMJ, 2000
- Influence of hospital- and surgeon-related factors on outcome after treatment of rectal cancer with or without preoperative radiotherapyBritish Journal of Surgery, 1997
- The mesorectum in rectal cancer surgery—the clue to pelvic recurrence?British Journal of Surgery, 1982