Introduction: Complex surgical procedures are associated with higher mortality and morbidity. There is a paucity of data supporting a volume-outcome relationship in the United Kingdom. We analysed Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) to contemplate the association of hospital provider volume and short-term outcomes (mortality rate and hospital stay) for 3 radical urological procedures in England. Materials and Methods: The HES database was extracted for radical prostatectomy (RP), radical cystectomy (RC) and radical nephrectomy (RN) using ICD-10 and OPCS-4 codes for 7 years. Hospitals were divided into quartiles depending on the annual hospital volume. The impact of hospital provider volume was analysed for outcomes. Results: Overall 43,946 patients were included in the study. RP patients had the lowest mortality rate (0.2%) and shorter in-patient stay (7 days). Mortality from RC and RN were 475 (5.3%) and 537 (2.6%), respectively. There was no significant difference for mortality following RP in four volume groups (p = 0.76). The mortality rate for RC decreased from 6.9% in the very low-volume group to 4.1% in the high-volume group (p < 0.001) without change in the in-hospital stay. The proportion of patients treated at high-volume centres for RP, RC and RN has increased from 0 to 42, 22 to 35 and 10 to 38%, respectively, over a 7-year study period. Conclusion: In England, hospital provider volume has a significant impact on outcome measures for radical pelvic urological procedures with a lower mortality (RC) and shorter in-patient stay (RP). Thus HES data from England support the hospital volume-outcome relationship and emphasise the centralisation of care for radical urological procedures.

Keywords:
Urological cancers, Radical cancer surgery, Volume-outcome relationship
This content is only available via PDF.
© 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel
2010
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.