Relation of Hospital Volume to Colostomy Rates and Survival for Patients With Rectal Cancer
Open Access
- 21 May 2003
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute
- Vol. 95 (10) , 708-716
- https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/95.10.708
Abstract
Background: Postoperative mortality after some types of cancer surgery is inversely related to the number of operations performed at a hospital (i.e., hospital volume). This study assessed the association of hospital volume with colostomy rates and survival for patients with rectal cancer in a large representative cohort identified from the California Cancer Registry. Methods: We identified 7257 patients diagnosed from January 1, 1994, through December 31, 1997, with stage I–III rectal cancer who underwent surgical resection. Registry data were linked to hospital discharge abstracts and ZIP-code-level data from the 1990 U.S. Census. Associations of hospital volume with permanent colostomy and 30-day mortality were assessed with the Mantel–Haenszel trend test and logistic regression. Overall survival was examined with the Kaplan–Meier method and a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. Multivariable analyses adjusted for demographic and clinical variables and patient clustering within hospitals. All tests of statistical significance were two-sided. Results: In unadjusted analyses across decreasing quartiles of hospital volume, we observed statistically significant increases in colostomy rates (29.5%, 31.8%, 35.2%, and 36.6%; P<.001) and in 30-day postoperative mortality (1.6%, 1.6%, 2.9%, and 4.8%; P<.001) and a decrease in 2-year survival (83.7%, 83.2%, 80.9%, and 76.6%; P<.001). The adjusted risks of permanent colostomy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.37, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.10 to 1.70), 30-day mortality (OR = 2.64, 95% CI = 1.41 to 4.93), and 2-year mortality (hazard ratio = 1.28, 95% CI = 1.15 to 1.44) were greater for patients at hospitals in the lowest volume quartile than for patients at hospitals in the highest volume quartile. Stratification by tumor stage and comorbidity index did not appreciably affect the results. Adjusted colostomy rates varied statistically significantly (P<.001) among individual hospitals independent of volume. Conclusions: Rectal cancer patients who underwent surgery at high-volume hospitals were less likely to have a permanent colostomy and had better survival rates than those treated in low-volume hospitals. Identifying processes of care that contribute to these differences may improve patients’ outcomes in all hospitals.Keywords
This publication has 42 references indexed in Scilit:
- Hospital Volume and Surgical Mortality in the United StatesNew England Journal of Medicine, 2002
- Hospital caseload and the results achieved in patients with rectal cancerBritish Journal of Surgery, 2001
- Influence of Hospital Procedure Volume on Outcomes Following Surgery for Colon CancerJAMA, 2000
- THE EFFECT OF HOSPITAL VOLUME ON MORTALITY AND RESOURCE USE AFTER RADICAL PROSTATECTOMYJournal of Urology, 2000
- Population-Based Study of Relationships Between Hospital Volume of Prostatectomies, Patient Outcomes, and Length of Hospital StayJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 1999
- Impact of Hospital Volume on Operative Mortality for Major Cancer SurgeryJAMA, 1998
- Importance of Hospital Volume in the Overall Management of Pancreatic CancerAnnals of Surgery, 1998
- Hospital volume differences and five-year survival from breast cancer.American Journal of Public Health, 1998
- Variations in treatment of rectal cancerDiseases of the Colon & Rectum, 1997
- Specialist surgeons and survival in breast cancerBMJ, 1996