Cargando…

Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis

BACKGROUND: Compliance with minimum volume standards for specific procedures serves as a criterion for high-quality patient care. International experiences report a centralization of the respective procedures. In Germany, minimum volume standards for hospitals were introduced in 2004 for 5 procedure...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Cruppé, Werner, Malik, Marc, Geraedts, Max
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4511553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26197817
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-0944-7
_version_ 1782382351948447744
author de Cruppé, Werner
Malik, Marc
Geraedts, Max
author_facet de Cruppé, Werner
Malik, Marc
Geraedts, Max
author_sort de Cruppé, Werner
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Compliance with minimum volume standards for specific procedures serves as a criterion for high-quality patient care. International experiences report a centralization of the respective procedures. In Germany, minimum volume standards for hospitals were introduced in 2004 for 5 procedures (complex esophageal and pancreatic interventions; liver, kidney and stem cell transplantations), in 2006 total knee replacement was added. This study explores whether any centralization is discernible for these procedures in Germany. METHODS: A retrospective longitudinal analysis of secondary data serves to determine a possible centralization of procedures from the system perspective. Centralization means that over time, fewer hospitals perform the respective procedure, the case volume in high-volume hospitals increases together with their percentage of the annual total case volume, and the case volume in low-volume hospitals decreases together with their percentage of the annual total case volume. Using data from the mandatory hospital quality reports for the years 2006, 2008 and 2010 we performed Kruskal Wallis and chi-square tests to evaluate potential centralization effects. RESULTS: No centralization was found for any of the six types of interventions over the period from 2006 to 2010. The annual case volume and the number of hospitals performing interventions rose at differing rates over the 5-year period depending on the type of intervention. Seven percent of esophagectomies and 14 % of pancreatectomies are still performed in hospitals with less than 10 interventions per year. CONCLUSIONS: For the purpose of further centralization of interventions it will be necessary to first analyze and then appropriately address the reasons for non-compliance from the hospital and patient perspective.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4511553
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45115532015-07-23 Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis de Cruppé, Werner Malik, Marc Geraedts, Max BMC Health Serv Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Compliance with minimum volume standards for specific procedures serves as a criterion for high-quality patient care. International experiences report a centralization of the respective procedures. In Germany, minimum volume standards for hospitals were introduced in 2004 for 5 procedures (complex esophageal and pancreatic interventions; liver, kidney and stem cell transplantations), in 2006 total knee replacement was added. This study explores whether any centralization is discernible for these procedures in Germany. METHODS: A retrospective longitudinal analysis of secondary data serves to determine a possible centralization of procedures from the system perspective. Centralization means that over time, fewer hospitals perform the respective procedure, the case volume in high-volume hospitals increases together with their percentage of the annual total case volume, and the case volume in low-volume hospitals decreases together with their percentage of the annual total case volume. Using data from the mandatory hospital quality reports for the years 2006, 2008 and 2010 we performed Kruskal Wallis and chi-square tests to evaluate potential centralization effects. RESULTS: No centralization was found for any of the six types of interventions over the period from 2006 to 2010. The annual case volume and the number of hospitals performing interventions rose at differing rates over the 5-year period depending on the type of intervention. Seven percent of esophagectomies and 14 % of pancreatectomies are still performed in hospitals with less than 10 interventions per year. CONCLUSIONS: For the purpose of further centralization of interventions it will be necessary to first analyze and then appropriately address the reasons for non-compliance from the hospital and patient perspective. BioMed Central 2015-07-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4511553/ /pubmed/26197817 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-0944-7 Text en © de Cruppé et al. 2015 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
de Cruppé, Werner
Malik, Marc
Geraedts, Max
Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis
title Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis
title_full Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis
title_fullStr Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis
title_full_unstemmed Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis
title_short Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis
title_sort minimum volume standards in german hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? a retrospective longitudinal data analysis
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4511553/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26197817
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-015-0944-7
work_keys_str_mv AT decruppewerner minimumvolumestandardsingermanhospitalsdotheygetalongwithprocedurecentralizationaretrospectivelongitudinaldataanalysis
AT malikmarc minimumvolumestandardsingermanhospitalsdotheygetalongwithprocedurecentralizationaretrospectivelongitudinaldataanalysis
AT geraedtsmax minimumvolumestandardsingermanhospitalsdotheygetalongwithprocedurecentralizationaretrospectivelongitudinaldataanalysis