PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

John D Birkmeyer

Publications and source records attributed to John D Birkmeyer.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2007

Use of adjuvant radiotherapy at hospitals with and without on-site radiation services.

BACKGROUND: In many areas of health care, whether patients receive specific medical interventions often is influenced heavily by the local availability of resources for delivering those services. However, relations between resource availability and utilization are relatively unexplored in cancer care, including perioperative adjuvant therapy. METHODS: The authors studied associations between the on-site availability of radiation services and the use of adjuvant radiotherapy using the national, linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare database (from 1992 to 2002). They examined 1 cancer for which the effectiveness of adjuvant radiotherapy was well established in randomized clinical trials (rectal cancer) and another cancer for which it was not (pancreatic cancer) (N = 10,198). The availability of on-site radiation services at the hospital where surgery was performed was assessed by using data from the American Hospital Association. In comparing rates of adjuvant radiotherapy, analyses were adjusted for both patient characteristics and other hospital attributes. RESULTS: For rectal cancer, the use of adjuvant radiotherapy was similar in patients who underwent surgery at centers with and without on-site radiation services (29% vs 29%, respectively). Among patients with pancreatic cancer, however, those who underwent surgery at hospitals with on-site radiation services were twice as likely to receive radiotherapy than patients who underwent surgery at hospitals without such services (43% vs 26%, respectively; adjusted odds ratio, 2.1; 95% confidence interval, 1.4-3.2). Adjusting for other factors, the groups had similar survival rates for each cancer. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of on-site radiation services significantly increased the likelihood that patients would receive radiotherapy, at least for cancers for which the effectiveness of such therapy was not well established.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Racial disparities in late survival after rectal cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: African-American patients experience higher mortality than Caucasian patients after surgery for most common cancer types. Whether longterm survival after rectal cancer surgery varies by race is less clear. STUDY DESIGN: Using 1992 to 2003 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data, we examined race and longterm survival among African-American and Caucasian rectal cancer patients undergoing resection. We identified racial differences in patient characteristics, structure, and processes of care. We then assessed mortality using a Cox proportional hazards model, sequentially adding variables to explore the extent to which they attenuated the association between race and mortality. RESULTS: African-American patients had a substantially poorer overall survival rate than Caucasian patients did. Five-year survival rates were 41% and 50%, respectively (p < 0.0001). African Americans were younger (p=0.006), more likely to reside in low income areas (p < 0.0001), and had more baseline comorbid disease (p < 0.0001). They were also more likely to be diagnosed emergently (p < 0.001) and with more advanced cancer (p < 0.001). Accounting for demographic and clinical characteristics reduced the mortality difference, although it remained pronounced (hazard ratio=1.13, CI=1.01 to 1.26). African Americans were more likely to be treated by low volume surgeons and less likely to receive adjuvant therapy (48.6% versus 60.9%, p < 0.0001). After adjusting for provider variables, the hazard ratio for mortality by race was additionally attenuated and became statistically nonsignificant (hazard ratio=1.05, CI=0.92 to 1.20). CONCLUSIONS: Poorer longterm survival after rectal cancer surgery among African Americans is explained by measurable differences in processes of care and patient characteristics. These data suggest that outcomes disparities could be reduced by strategies targeting earlier diagnosis and increasing adjuvant therapy use among African-American patients.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

The rise and fall of antireflux surgery in the United States.

BACKGROUND: National rates of laparoscopic antireflux surgery grew steadily in the 1990s. Since then, a highly visible randomized trial has questioned the long-term effectiveness of antireflux surgery, several new endoscopic therapies have been developed, and proton pump inhibitors have become available over the counter. Whether these recent developments have had an impact on the use of antireflux surgery remains unknown. METHODS: Using data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample, this study identified all patients older than 18 years who underwent antireflux surgery between 1994 and 2003. Sampling weights were used to estimate the total number of procedures performed in the United States each year. Population-based rates were determined using denominators from U.S. census data. RESULTS: Confirming the results of earlier studies, this study found that the annual number of antireflux procedures grew rapidly during the 1990s, peaking at 31,695 (15.7 cases per 100,000 adults) in 1999. After 1999, surgical rates declined steadily, falling approximately 30% by 2003 to 23,998 (11 cases per 100,000; p < 0.0001). Use of antireflux procedures fell more precipitously among younger patients (39% for 30- to 49-year-olds vs 12.5% for those older than 60 years; p < 0.0001) and at teaching hospitals (36% vs 23% at nonteaching hospitals; p < 0.0001). The proportion of cases managed laparoscopically remained stable after 1999. CONCLUSIONS: The use of antireflux surgery in the United States has declined substantially. Although other factors may be involved, this trend may reflect new questions about the long-term effectiveness of surgery and suggests the need for prospective randomized clinical trials assessing current therapies.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Volume and process of care in high-risk cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although relations between procedure volume and operative mortality are well established for high-risk cancer operations, differences in clinical practice between high-volume and low-volume centers are not well understood. The current study was conducted to examine relations between hospital volume, process of care, and operative mortality in cancer surgery. METHODS: Using the Medicare claims database (2000-2002), we identified all patients undergoing major resections for lung, esophageal, gastric, liver, or pancreatic cancer (n=71,558). Preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative processes of care potentially related to operative mortality were identified from inpatient, outpatient, and physician claims files using appropriate International Classification of Diseases--Clinical Modification (ICD-9) and Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. We then assessed variation in the use of each process according to hospital volume, adjusting for patient characteristics and procedure type. Study Participants were US Medicare patients. The main outcome measure was specific processes of care. RESULTS: Relative to those at low-volume centers (lowest 20th by volume), patients at high-volume hospitals (highest 20th) were significantly more likely to undergo stress tests (odds ratio [OR]: 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.21-1.87), but not other preoperative imaging tests. They were more likely to see medical or radiation oncologists (OR: 1.37, 95% CI: 1.16-1.62), but not other specialists, preoperatively. Although blood transfusions and use of epidural pain management did not vary significantly by volume, patients at high-volume hospitals had significantly longer operations and were more likely to receive perioperative invasive monitoring (OR: 2.56, 95% CI: 1.82-3.60). Differences in measurable processes of care did not explain volume-related differences in operative mortality to any significant degree. CONCLUSIONS: Although high-volume and low-volume hospitals differ with regard to many aspects of perioperative care, mechanisms underlying volume-outcome relations in high-risk cancer surgery remain to be identified.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

The volume-performance relationship in esophagectomy.

The current literature demonstrates that both hospital volume and surgeon volume are inversely related to operative mortality for esophageal resection. Given the heterogeneity of the volume-outcome literature, it is difficult to identify minimum volume thresholds at which satisfactory performance is achieved. Both volume-based hospital referral and process improvement provide compelling and sometimes competing strategies for translating evidence about volume-outcome relationships into policy. Each approach has significant limitations that preclude uniform implementation nationwide but nonetheless should be a focus for continued investigation and application, with the goal of providing uniform and high-quality care after esophagectomy.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2006

Intensive care unit physician staffing: financial modeling of the Leapfrog standard.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate from a hospital's perspective the costs and savings, over a 1-yr period, of implementing The Leapfrog Group's Intensive Care Unit Physician Staffing (IPS) standard compared with the existing standard of nonintensivist staffing in adult intensive care units. DESIGN: Using published data, we developed a financial model of costs and savings for 6-, 12- and 18-bed intensive care units using conservative estimates for all variables. Sensitivity analyses, including a best-case and worst-case scenario, were performed to evaluate the impact of changing assumptions on the outcome of the model. SETTING: Nonrural hospitals in the United States. PATIENTS: All adult intensive care unit patients. INTERVENTIONS: The IPS standard requires that intensive care units have a dedicated intensivist present during daytime hours. Outside of these hours, an intensivist must be immediately available by pager, and a physician or "physician extender" must be in the hospital and able to immediately reach intensive care unit patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Cost savings ranged from $510,000 to $3.3 million for 6- to 18-bed intensive care units. The best-case scenario demonstrated savings of $4.2-13 million. Under the worst-case scenario, there was a net cost of $890,000 to $1.3 million. CONCLUSIONS: Financial modeling of implementation of the IPS standard using conservative assumptions demonstrated cost savings to hospitals. Only under worst-case scenario assumptions did intensivist staffing result in additional cost to hospitals. These economic findings must be interpreted in the context of significant reductions in patient morbidity and mortality rates also associated with intensivist staffing. Given the magnitude of its clinical and financial impact, hospital leaders should be asking "how to" rather than "whether to" implement The Leapfrog Group's ICU Physician Staffing standard.

Journal Article↗
PubMed2006

Are mortality rates for different operations related?: implications for measuring the quality of noncardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Except in cardiac surgery, measuring quality with procedure-specific mortality rates is unreliable because of small sample sizes at individual hospitals. Statistical power can be improved by combining mortality data from multiple operations. We sought to determine whether this approach would still be useful in understanding performance with individual procedures. METHODS: We studied 11 high-risk operations performed in the national Medicare population (1996-1999). For each operation, we calculated 1) the risk-adjusted mortality rate for the procedure and 2) the mortality rate with up to 10 other operations combined ("other" mortality). To test for an association between these mortality rates, we calculated the correlation coefficient adjusting for random variation. We then collapsed hospitals into quintiles of other mortality and calculated procedure-specific mortality rates within each of these quintiles. RESULTS: Mortality with specific operations was modestly correlated with other mortality: coefficients ranged from 0.14 for pneumonectomy to 0.35 for esophagectomy. Despite small to moderate correlations, other mortality was a good predictor of procedure-specific mortality for 10 of the 11 operations. Pancreatic resection had the strongest relationship, with procedure-specific mortality rates at hospitals in the worst quintile of other mortality 3-fold higher than those in the best quintile (15.2% vs. 6.3%, P < 0.001). Pneumonectomy had the weakest relationship with no significant relationship between other mortality and procedure-specific mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Hospitals with low mortality rates for 1 operation tend to have lower mortality rates for other operations. These relationships suggest that different operations share important structures and processes of care related to performance. Future efforts aimed at predicting procedure-specific performance should consider incorporating data from other operations at that hospital.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Race and surgical mortality in the United States.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes racial differences in postoperative mortality following 8 cardiovascular and cancer procedures and assesses possible explanations for these differences. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Although racial disparities in the use of surgical procedures are well established, relationships between race and operative mortality have not been assessed systematically. METHODS: We used national Medicare data to identify all patients undergoing one of 8 cardiovascular and cancer procedures between 1994 and 1999. We used multiple logistic regression to assess differences in operative mortality (death within 30 days or before discharge) between black patients and white patients, controlling for patient characteristics. Adding hospital indicators to these models, we then assessed the extent to which racial differences in operative mortality could be accounted for by the hospital in which patients were cared for. RESULTS: Black patients had higher crude mortality rates than white patients for 7 of the 8 operations, including coronary artery bypass, aortic valve replacement, abdominal aortic aneurysm repair, carotid endarterectomy, radical cystectomy, pancreatic resection, and esophagectomy. Among these 7 procedures, odds ratios of mortality (black versus white) ranged from 1.23 (95% confidence interval, 1.18-1.29) for CABG to 1.61 (95% confidence interval, 1.28-2.03) for esophagectomy. Adjusting for patient characteristics had modest or no effect on odds ratios of mortality by race. However, there remained few clinically or statistically significant differences in mortality by race after we accounted for hospital. Hospitals that treated a large proportion of black patients had higher mortality rates for all 8 procedures, for white as well as black patients. CONCLUSIONS: Black patients have higher operative mortality risks across a wide range of surgical procedures, in large part because of higher mortality rates at the hospitals they attend.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Operative mortality and procedure volume as predictors of subsequent hospital performance.

CONTEXT: Despite growing interest in evidence-based hospital referral for selected surgical procedures, there remains considerable debate about which measures should be used to identify high-quality providers. OBJECTIVES: To assess the usefulness of historical mortality rates and procedure volume as predictors of subsequent hospital performance with different procedures. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Using data from the national Medicare population, we identified all U.S. hospitals performing one of 4 high-risk procedures between 1994 and 1997. Hospitals were ranked and grouped into quintiles according to 1) operative mortality (adjusted for patient characteristics) and 2) procedure volume. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Risk-adjusted operative mortality in 1998 to 1999. RESULTS: Although historical mortality and volume both predicted subsequent hospital performance, the predictive value of each varied by procedure. For coronary artery bypass graft surgery, mortality rates in 1998 to 1999 differed by 3.3% across quintiles of historical mortality (3.6% to 6.9%, best to worst quintile, respectively), but only by 1.0% across volume quintiles (4.8% to 5.8%). In contrast, for esophagectomy, mortality rates in 1998 to 1999 differed by 12.5% across volume quintiles (7.5% to 20.0%, best to worst quintile, respectively), but only by 1.5% across quintiles of historical mortality (11.4% to 12.9%). Historical mortality and procedure volume had comparable value as predictors of subsequent performance for pancreatic resection and elective abdominal aortic aneurysm repair. Our findings were similar when we repeated the analysis using data from later years. CONCLUSIONS: Historical measures of operative mortality or procedure volume identify hospitals likely to have better outcomes in the future. The optimal measure for selecting high-quality providers depends on the procedure.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

Laparoscopic skills are improved with LapMentor training: results of a randomized, double-blinded study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if prior training on the LapMentor laparoscopic simulator leads to improved performance of basic laparoscopic skills in the animate operating room environment. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Numerous influences have led to the development of computer-aided laparoscopic simulators: a need for greater efficiency in training, the unique and complex nature of laparoscopic surgery, and the increasing demand that surgeons demonstrate competence before proceeding to the operating room. The LapMentor simulator is expensive, however, and its use must be validated and justified prior to implementation into surgical training programs. METHODS: Nineteen surgical interns were randomized to training on the LapMentor laparoscopic simulator (n = 10) or to a control group (no simulator training, n = 9). Subjects randomized to the LapMentor trained to expert criterion levels 2 consecutive times on 6 designated basic skills modules. All subjects then completed a series of laparoscopic exercises in a live porcine model, and performance was assessed independently by 2 blinded reviewers. Time, accuracy rates, and global assessments of performance were recorded with an interrater reliability between reviewers of 0.99. RESULTS: LapMentor trained interns completed the 30 degrees camera navigation exercise in significantly less time than control interns (166 +/- 52 vs. 220 +/- 39 seconds, P < 0.05); they also achieved higher accuracy rates in identifying the required objects with the laparoscope (96% +/- 8% vs. 82% +/- 15%, P < 0.05). Similarly, on the two-handed object transfer exercise, task completion time for LapMentor trained versus control interns was 130 +/- 23 versus 184 +/- 43 seconds (P < 0.01) with an accuracy rate of 98% +/- 5% versus 80% +/- 13% (P < 0.001). Additionally, LapMentor trained interns outperformed control subjects with regard to camera navigation skills, efficiency of motion, optimal instrument handling, perceptual ability, and performance of safe electrocautery. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that prior training on the LapMentor laparoscopic simulator leads to improved resident performance of basic skills in the animate operating room environment. This work marks the first prospective, randomized evaluation of the LapMentor simulator, and provides evidence that LapMentor training may lead to improved operating room performance.

Clinical Competence↗
PubMed2006

Surgeon age and operative mortality in the United States.

OBJECTIVES: Although recent studies suggest that physician age is inversely related to clinical performance in primary care, relationships between surgeon age and patient outcomes have not been examined systematically. METHODS: Using national Medicare files, we examined operative mortality in approximately 461,000 patients undergoing 1 of 8 procedures between 1998 and 1999. We used multiple logistic regression to assess relationships between surgeon age (< or =40 years, 41-50 years, 51-60 years, and >60 years) and operative mortality (in-hospital or within 30 days), adjusting for patient characteristics, surgeon procedure volume, and hospital attributes. RESULTS: Although older surgeons had slightly lower procedure volumes than younger surgeons for some procedures, there were few clinically important differences in patient characteristics by surgeon age. Compared with surgeons aged 41 to 50 years, surgeons over 60 years had higher mortality rates with pancreatectomy (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.67; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12-2.49), coronary artery bypass grafting (OR, 1.17; 95% CI, 1.05-1.29), and carotid endarterectomy (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.04-1.40). The effect of surgeon age was largely restricted to those surgeons with low procedure volumes and was unrelated to mortality for esophagectomy, cystectomy, lung resection, aortic valve replacement, or aortic aneurysm repair. Less experienced surgeons (< or =40 years of age) had comparable mortality rates to surgeons aged 41 to 50 years for all procedures. CONCLUSIONS: For some complex procedures, surgeons older than 60 years, particularly those with low procedure volumes, have higher operative mortality rates than their younger counterparts. For most procedures, however, surgeon age is not an important predictor of operative risk.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Life expectancy benefits of gastric bypass surgery.

Bariatric surgery is the most effective treatment for achieving sustained weight loss in morbidly obese patients. Although the use of gastric bypass is growing rapidly, the potential life expectancy benefits of the procedure are unknown. We created a Markov decision analysis model to examine the effect of gastric bypass surgery on life expectancy in morbidly obese patients (body mass index [BMI] = 40 kg/m2). Input assumptions for the model were obtained from published life tables (baseline mortality risks), epidemiologic studies (obesity-related excess mortality), and large case series (surgical outcomes). In our baseline analysis, a 40-year-old woman (BMI = 40 kg/m2) would gain 2.6 years of life expectancy by undergoing gastric bypass (38.7 years versus 36.2 years without surgery). In sensitivity analysis, life-years gained with surgery remained substantial when assumptions were varied across reasonable ranges for surgical mortality risk (1.0-3.0 years) and effectiveness (0.9-4.4 years). Life-years gained with gastric bypass surgery did not vary considerably by age and sex subgroups. Relative to other major surgical procedures, gastric bypass for morbid obesity is associated with substantial gains in life expectancy. Long- term data from prospective studies are needed to confirm this finding.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Classifying cause of death after cancer surgery.

A retrospective, single-center study was conducted to understand variation in mortality after elective cancer surgery. Fifty-two patients who died perioperatively after elective cancer resections (colon, esophageal, pancreatic, lung, gastric and liver) were identified. A methodology was developed and used during medical record review to capture the occurrence and chronology of 21 postoperative complications. Data were reviewed by 3 attending surgeons who assigned cause of death based on information from the entire clinical record. This methodology demonstrated good construct validity, with 81% agreement between cause of death assigned by expert review of data from the instrument and that assigned by expert review of the clinical records (kappa = 0.75, P < .005). Cause-specific mortality can be reliably and systematically measured after cancer surgery. Understanding variation in cause-specific mortality can inform future quality improvement efforts.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

How do elderly patients decide where to go for major surgery? Telephone interview survey.

OBJECTIVE: To learn how patients in Medicare, the US medical insurance programme that covers elderly patients, made decisions about where to undergo major surgery and how they would make future decisions. DESIGN: National telephone interview study. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: 510 randomly selected Medicare beneficiaries who had undergone an elective, high risk procedure about 3 years earlier--abdominal aneurysm repair (n = 103), heart valve replacement surgery (n = 96), or resection of the bladder (n = 119), lung (n = 128), or stomach (n = 64) for cancer. Response rates were 48% among eligible survivors and 68% among those able to participate. RESULTS: Although all participants could choose where to have surgery, only 55% said there was an alternative hospital in their area where they could have gone. Overall, only 10% of respondents seriously considered going elsewhere for surgery. Few respondents (11%) looked for information to compare hospitals. Almost all respondents thought their hospital and surgeon had good reputations (94% and 88%, respectively), beliefs mostly determined by what their referring doctors said. When asked how much various factors would influence their advice to a friend about choosing where to go for major surgery, surgeon reputation was the most influential (78% said it would influence their advice "a lot"), followed by the hospital having "nationally recognised" surgeons (63%), and then various performance data (surgeon volume (58%), nurse:patient ratios (49%), number of operations carried out by the hospital (48%), and hospital operative mortality (45%)). Forty per cent said they would act on mortality data, indicating that they would switch from their initial choice of hospital to a different one if its mortality was a percentage point lower (that is, 3% v 4%). CONCLUSION: Some respondents claimed they would switch hospital for elective surgery on the basis of mortality data. Since most respondents relied on their referring physician's opinion to decide where to have surgery, surgical performance data ought to be accessible to referring physicians.

Aged↗
PubMed2005

Do cancer centers designated by the National Cancer Institute have better surgical outcomes?

BACKGROUND: The National Cancer Institute (NCI) designates cancer centers as regional centers of excellence in research and patient care. Although these centers often advertise their superior outcomes, their relative performance has not been examined empirically. In the current study, the authors assessed whether patients at NCI cancer centers compared with patients at control hospitals had lower mortality rates after major cancer surgery. METHODS: Using the national Medicare database (1994-1999), the authors assessed surgical mortality and late survival rates for 63,860 elderly patients undergoing resection for lung, esophageal, gastric, pancreatic, bladder, or colon carcinoma. For assessing performance, patients treated at the 51 NCI cancer centers were compared with patients from 51 control hospitals with the highest volumes for each procedure. Mortality rates (surgical and 5-year rates) were adjusted for patient characteristics and residual differences in procedure volume. RESULTS: NCI cancer centers had lower adjusted surgical mortality rates than control hospitals for 4 of the 6 procedures, including colectomy (5.4% vs. 6.7%; P = 0.026), pulmonary resection (6.3% vs. 7.9%; P = 0.010), gastrectomy (8.0% vs. 12.2%; P < 0.001), and esophagectomy (7.9% vs. 10.9%; P = 0.027). Nonsignificant trends toward lower adjusted operative mortality rates at NCI cancer centers were also observed for cystectomy and pancreatic resection. Among patients surviving surgery, however, there were no important differences in subsequent 5-year mortality rates between NCI cancer centers and control hospitals for any of the procedures. CONCLUSIONS: For many cancer procedures, patients undergoing surgery at NCI-designated cancer centers had lower surgical mortality rates than those treated at comparably high-volume hospitals, but similar long-term survival rates.

Adult↗