Cargando…

Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?

BACKGROUND: Minimum hospital procedure volumes are discussed as an instrument for quality assurance. In 2004 Germany introduced such annual minimum volumes nationwide on five surgical procedures: kidney, liver, stem cell transplantation, complex oesophageal, and pancreatic interventions. The present...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Cruppé, Werner, Ohmann, Christian, Blum, Karl, Geraedts, Max
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2007
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2204003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17941973
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-7-165
_version_ 1782148411615608832
author de Cruppé, Werner
Ohmann, Christian
Blum, Karl
Geraedts, Max
author_facet de Cruppé, Werner
Ohmann, Christian
Blum, Karl
Geraedts, Max
author_sort de Cruppé, Werner
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Minimum hospital procedure volumes are discussed as an instrument for quality assurance. In 2004 Germany introduced such annual minimum volumes nationwide on five surgical procedures: kidney, liver, stem cell transplantation, complex oesophageal, and pancreatic interventions. The present investigation is the first part of a study evaluating the effects of these minimum volumes on health care provision. Research questions address how many hospitals and cases were affected by minimum volume regulations in 2004, how affected hospitals were distributed according to minimum volumes, and how many hospitals within the 16 German states complied with the standards set for 2004. METHODS: The evaluation is based on the mandatory hospital quality reports for 2004. In the reports, all hospitals are statutorily obliged to state the number of procedures performed for each minimum volume. The data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: In 2004, 485 out of 1710 German hospitals providing acute care and approximately 0.14% of all hospital cases were affected by minimum volume regulations. Liver, kidney, and stem cell transplantation affected from 23 to hospitals; complex oesophageal and pancreatic interventions affected from 297 to 455 hospitals. The inter-state comparison of the average hospital care area demonstrates large differences between city states and large area states and the eastern and western German states ranging from a minimum 51 km(2 )up to a maximum 23.200 km(2), varying according to each procedure. A range of 9% – 16% of the transplantation hospitals did not comply with the standards affecting 1% – 2% of the patients whereas 29% and 18% of the hospitals treating complex oesophageal and pancreatic interventions failed the standards affecting 2% – 5% of the prevailing cases. CONCLUSION: In 2004, the newly introduced minimum volume regulations affected only up to a quarter of German acute care hospitals and few cases. However, excluding the hospitals not meeting the minimum volume standards from providing the respective procedures deserves considering two aspects: the hospital health care provision concepts by the German states as being responsible and from a patient perspective the geographically equal access to hospital care.
format Text
id pubmed-2204003
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2007
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-22040032008-01-17 Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004? de Cruppé, Werner Ohmann, Christian Blum, Karl Geraedts, Max BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Minimum hospital procedure volumes are discussed as an instrument for quality assurance. In 2004 Germany introduced such annual minimum volumes nationwide on five surgical procedures: kidney, liver, stem cell transplantation, complex oesophageal, and pancreatic interventions. The present investigation is the first part of a study evaluating the effects of these minimum volumes on health care provision. Research questions address how many hospitals and cases were affected by minimum volume regulations in 2004, how affected hospitals were distributed according to minimum volumes, and how many hospitals within the 16 German states complied with the standards set for 2004. METHODS: The evaluation is based on the mandatory hospital quality reports for 2004. In the reports, all hospitals are statutorily obliged to state the number of procedures performed for each minimum volume. The data were analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: In 2004, 485 out of 1710 German hospitals providing acute care and approximately 0.14% of all hospital cases were affected by minimum volume regulations. Liver, kidney, and stem cell transplantation affected from 23 to hospitals; complex oesophageal and pancreatic interventions affected from 297 to 455 hospitals. The inter-state comparison of the average hospital care area demonstrates large differences between city states and large area states and the eastern and western German states ranging from a minimum 51 km(2 )up to a maximum 23.200 km(2), varying according to each procedure. A range of 9% – 16% of the transplantation hospitals did not comply with the standards affecting 1% – 2% of the patients whereas 29% and 18% of the hospitals treating complex oesophageal and pancreatic interventions failed the standards affecting 2% – 5% of the prevailing cases. CONCLUSION: In 2004, the newly introduced minimum volume regulations affected only up to a quarter of German acute care hospitals and few cases. However, excluding the hospitals not meeting the minimum volume standards from providing the respective procedures deserves considering two aspects: the hospital health care provision concepts by the German states as being responsible and from a patient perspective the geographically equal access to hospital care. BioMed Central 2007-10-17 /pmc/articles/PMC2204003/ /pubmed/17941973 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-7-165 Text en Copyright © 2007 de Cruppé et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
de Cruppé, Werner
Ohmann, Christian
Blum, Karl
Geraedts, Max
Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?
title Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?
title_full Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?
title_fullStr Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?
title_short Evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in Germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?
title_sort evaluating compulsory minimum volume standards in germany: how many hospitals were compliant in 2004?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2204003/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17941973
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-7-165
work_keys_str_mv AT decruppewerner evaluatingcompulsoryminimumvolumestandardsingermanyhowmanyhospitalswerecompliantin2004
AT ohmannchristian evaluatingcompulsoryminimumvolumestandardsingermanyhowmanyhospitalswerecompliantin2004
AT blumkarl evaluatingcompulsoryminimumvolumestandardsingermanyhowmanyhospitalswerecompliantin2004
AT geraedtsmax evaluatingcompulsoryminimumvolumestandardsingermanyhowmanyhospitalswerecompliantin2004