Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

Almirall says comparing SMART designs will increase treatment quality for children with autism

Thompson says America must "unchoose" policies that have led to mass incarceration

Alter says lack of access to administrative data is "big drag on research"


Susan Murphy to speak at U-M kickoff for data science initiative, Oct 6, Rackham

Andrew Goodman-Bacon, former trainee, wins 2015 Nevins Prize for best dissertation in economic history

Deirdre Bloome wins ASA award for work on racial inequality and intergenerational transmission

Bob Willis awarded 2015 Jacob Mincer Award for Lifetime Contributions to the Field of Labor Economics

Next Brown Bag

Monday, Oct 12 at noon, 6050 ISR
Joe Grengs: Policy & planning for transportation equity

Identifying High-Quality Bariatric Surgery Centers: Hospital Volume or Risk-Adjusted Outcomes?

Publication Abstract

Dimick, Justin B., Nicholas Osborne, Lauren Nicholas, and John D. Birkmeyer. 2009. "Identifying High-Quality Bariatric Surgery Centers: Hospital Volume or Risk-Adjusted Outcomes?" Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 209(6): 702-706.

Background Payers and professional organizations are expanding accreditation and “centers of excellence” programs in bariatric surgery. Rather than directly measuring outcomes, most programs rely on procedure volume. We sought to determine whether risk-adjusted outcomes or hospital volume were better at predicting future hospital morbidity with bariatric surgery.

Study Design We identified all patients who underwent gastric bypass in the New York State Inpatient database (n = 32,381 patients, n = 105 hospitals). Morbidity was ascertained using a previously validated combination of diagnostic and procedure codes. We first calculated the risk-adjusted morbidity and volume at each hospital during a 2-year period (2003 to 2004). We then ascertained the proportion of hospital-level variation explained by each measure using hierarchical modeling techniques. Finally, we compared the ability of each measure to predict future performance, as assessed with risk-adjusted morbidity, in the next 2 years (2005 to 2006).

Results Risk-adjusted morbidity explained 83% of future hospital-level variation in morbidity compared with only 21% for hospital volume. When comparing the “best” with the “worst” hospital quartiles, risk-adjusted morbidity predicted a more than fourfold difference in future performance (1.7% versus 7.2%; odds ratio [OR]: 4.5; 95% CI, 3.5 to 5.9). Hospital volume predicted only a twofold difference (2.5% versus 4.5%; OR: 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5 to 2.4) from the best to worst quartile.

Conclusions Risk-adjusted morbidity is much better than hospital volume at predicting future performance with bariatric surgery. Rather than focusing on volume, accreditation and centers of excellence programs should focus more on directly measuring outcomes.

DOI:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.09.009 (Full Text)

Licensed Access Link

Country of focus: United States of America.

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next