Cargando…

Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION: Many recent studies have investigated the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery. In some cases, the results have prompted the centralization of surgical activity. However, the methodologies and interpretations differ markedly from one study to another. The objective of the pr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Levaillant, Mathieu, Marcilly, Romaric, Levaillant, Lucie, Michel, Philippe, Hamel-Broza, Jean-François, Vallet, Benoît, Lamer, Antoine
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8502281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34627143
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01396-6
_version_ 1784580853444116480
author Levaillant, Mathieu
Marcilly, Romaric
Levaillant, Lucie
Michel, Philippe
Hamel-Broza, Jean-François
Vallet, Benoît
Lamer, Antoine
author_facet Levaillant, Mathieu
Marcilly, Romaric
Levaillant, Lucie
Michel, Philippe
Hamel-Broza, Jean-François
Vallet, Benoît
Lamer, Antoine
author_sort Levaillant, Mathieu
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Many recent studies have investigated the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery. In some cases, the results have prompted the centralization of surgical activity. However, the methodologies and interpretations differ markedly from one study to another. The objective of the present scoping review was to describe the various features used to assess the volume-outcome relationship: the analyzed datasets, study population, outcome, covariates, confounders, volume modalities, and statistical methods. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review was conducted according to a study protocol published in BMJ Open in 2020. Two authors (both of whom had helped to design the study protocol) screened publications independently according to the title, the abstract and then the full text. To ensure exhaustivity, all the papers included by each reviewer went through to the next step. INTERPRETATION: The 403 included studies covered 90 types of surgery, 61 types of outcome, and 72 covariates or potential confounders. 191 (47.5%) studies focussed on oncological surgery and 37.8% focussed visceral or digestive tract surgery. Overall, 86.6% of the studies found a statistically significant volume-outcome relationship, although the findings differed from one type of surgery to another. Furthermore, the types of outcome and the covariates were highly diverse. The majority of studies were performed in Western countries, and oncological and visceral surgical procedures were over-represented; this might limit the generalizability and comparability of the studies’ results. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-021-01396-6.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8502281
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-85022812021-10-20 Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review Levaillant, Mathieu Marcilly, Romaric Levaillant, Lucie Michel, Philippe Hamel-Broza, Jean-François Vallet, Benoît Lamer, Antoine BMC Med Res Methodol Research INTRODUCTION: Many recent studies have investigated the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery. In some cases, the results have prompted the centralization of surgical activity. However, the methodologies and interpretations differ markedly from one study to another. The objective of the present scoping review was to describe the various features used to assess the volume-outcome relationship: the analyzed datasets, study population, outcome, covariates, confounders, volume modalities, and statistical methods. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The review was conducted according to a study protocol published in BMJ Open in 2020. Two authors (both of whom had helped to design the study protocol) screened publications independently according to the title, the abstract and then the full text. To ensure exhaustivity, all the papers included by each reviewer went through to the next step. INTERPRETATION: The 403 included studies covered 90 types of surgery, 61 types of outcome, and 72 covariates or potential confounders. 191 (47.5%) studies focussed on oncological surgery and 37.8% focussed visceral or digestive tract surgery. Overall, 86.6% of the studies found a statistically significant volume-outcome relationship, although the findings differed from one type of surgery to another. Furthermore, the types of outcome and the covariates were highly diverse. The majority of studies were performed in Western countries, and oncological and visceral surgical procedures were over-represented; this might limit the generalizability and comparability of the studies’ results. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12874-021-01396-6. BioMed Central 2021-10-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8502281/ /pubmed/34627143 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01396-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Levaillant, Mathieu
Marcilly, Romaric
Levaillant, Lucie
Michel, Philippe
Hamel-Broza, Jean-François
Vallet, Benoît
Lamer, Antoine
Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review
title Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review
title_full Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review
title_fullStr Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review
title_short Assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review
title_sort assessing the hospital volume-outcome relationship in surgery: a scoping review
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8502281/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34627143
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-021-01396-6
work_keys_str_mv AT levaillantmathieu assessingthehospitalvolumeoutcomerelationshipinsurgeryascopingreview
AT marcillyromaric assessingthehospitalvolumeoutcomerelationshipinsurgeryascopingreview
AT levaillantlucie assessingthehospitalvolumeoutcomerelationshipinsurgeryascopingreview
AT michelphilippe assessingthehospitalvolumeoutcomerelationshipinsurgeryascopingreview
AT hamelbrozajeanfrancois assessingthehospitalvolumeoutcomerelationshipinsurgeryascopingreview
AT valletbenoit assessingthehospitalvolumeoutcomerelationshipinsurgeryascopingreview
AT lamerantoine assessingthehospitalvolumeoutcomerelationshipinsurgeryascopingreview