This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Save to my personal folders Download to citation manager Rights & Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Konety, B. R. Articles by Smith, B. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Konety, B. R. Articles by Smith, B. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Mortality After Major Surgery for Urologic Cancers in Specialized Urology Hospitals: Are They Any Better?

Badrinath R. Konety, Veerasathpurush Allareddy, Sanjukta Modak, Brian Smith

From the Departments of Urology, Epidemiology, Health Management and Policy, and Biostatistics, Carver College of Medicine and College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA

Address reprint requests to Badrinath R. Konety, MD, MBA, Department of Urology, University of California San Francisco, 1600 Divisadero A624, San Francisco, CA 94143-1695; e-mail: bkonety{at}urology.ucsf.edu

PURPOSE: Specialty-specific hospitals and hospitals with a high volume of complex procedures have been shown to have better outcomes. We sought to determine whether a high volume of unrelated complex procedures or procedures in the same specialty area (urology) could translate into better outcomes after major urologic cancer surgery.

METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of administrative discharge abstract data from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample of the Health Care Utilization Project for years 1998 to 2002. Comparison of outcome after three major urologic cancer–related surgical procedures (radical cystectomy [RC], radical nephrectomy [RN], and radical prostatectomy [RP]) at hospitals by procedure-specific volume, specialized urology status, and Leapfrog criteria was obtained to determine in-hospital mortality after the procedure. All patients in the database with a diagnosis of bladder, kidney, or prostate cancer being admitted for RC, RN, or RP between 1998 and 2002 were included.

RESULTS: Neither specialized urology status nor meeting Leapfrog volume criteria for unrelated procedures was associated with lower odds of in-hospital mortality after any of the procedures examined. High-volume hospitals (for RC and RP) and moderate-volume hospitals (for RP) were associated with lower odds of mortality. None of the examined hospital volume–related factors was associated with lower odds of mortality after RN.

CONCLUSION: In-hospital mortality after two of three major urologic cancer procedures is affected only by procedure-specific volumes. Generalized process measures existing in hospitals performing a high volume of general urologic procedures or unrelated complex procedures may be less important determinants of procedure-specific outcomes in patients.

Authors’ disclosures of potential conflicts of interest and author contributions are found at the end of this article.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Facebook    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				G. H. Lyman, N. M. Kuderer, and S. J. Freedland Does Treatment Intensity Matter in Superficial Bladder Cancer? Consensus, Clinical Practice, and Confounding J Natl Cancer Inst, April 15, 2009; 101(8): 543 - 545. [Full Text] [PDF]