The Relationship Between Hospital Volume and Outcomes of Hepatic Resection for Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Open Access
- 1 January 1999
- journal article
- research article
- Published by American Medical Association (AMA) in Archives of Surgery
- Vol. 134 (1) , 30-35
- https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.134.1.30
Abstract
TODAY'S CHANGING health care environment is being driven, in part, by external pressures on providers to deliver economical, high-quality care. For some medical therapies, quality of care varies little among providers, making cost a primary focus.1,2 For other treatments, however, quality of care is not uniform. Such is the case with coronary angioplasty, coronary surgery, and bone marrow and solid organ transplantation. For these complex therapies, a volume-outcome relationship exists where poor patient outcome, such as in-hospital mortality, is related to low provider volume and inexperience.1,3-6 These volume-outcome relations serve as the basis for the argument that high-risk procedures should be regionalized to centers of excellence.3,7,8Keywords
This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Factors affecting long-term outcome after hepatic resection for hepatocellular carcinomaThe American Journal of Surgery, 1995
- The Effects of Regionalization on Cost and Outcome for One General High-Risk Surgical ProcedureAnnals of Surgery, 1995
- Operative results in 143 patients with hepatocellular carcinomaWorld Journal of Surgery, 1993
- The Relation between Experience and Outcome in Heart TransplantationNew England Journal of Medicine, 1992
- Association of volume with outcome of coronary artery bypass graft surgery. Scheduled vs nonscheduled operationsJAMA, 1987
- Should Surgery Be Regionalized?Surgical Clinics of North America, 1982
- How Good Are the Data?Medical Care, 1982
- Should Operations Be Regionalized?New England Journal of Medicine, 1979