1 / 13

Volume-Outcome Relationship: An Econometric Approach to CABG Surgery

Volume-Outcome Relationship: An Econometric Approach to CABG Surgery. Hsueh-Fen Chen (VCU) Gloria J. Bazzoli (VCU) Askar Chukmaitov (FSU) Funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (HS 13094-03). Rationale for the Study.

benoit
Download Presentation

Volume-Outcome Relationship: An Econometric Approach to CABG Surgery

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Volume-Outcome Relationship: An Econometric Approach to CABG Surgery Hsueh-Fen Chen (VCU) Gloria J. Bazzoli (VCU) Askar Chukmaitov (FSU) Funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (HS 13094-03)

  2. Rationale for the Study • Clinicians and policymakers continue to debate the basis for volume-quality relationships: • Practice makes perfect • Selective referral • Outcomes of CABG surgery are of great interest: • one of the most common surgeries in the US • volume thresholds have been recommended by Leapfrog Group • regionalization vs non-regionalization

  3. Research Question • Do volume-outcome relationships for CABG surgery in hospitals reflect selective referral, practice makes perfect, or both?

  4. Findings from Prior Research • Several studies have found high CABG volume does not lead to better outcomes at the hospital level • (Luft, 1980; Luft, et al., 1987; Shroyer, 1996) • At patient level, mixed results exist about CABG volume-outcome relationship • (Hannan, et al., 1989; 1991; Shroyer, et al., 1996; Sollano et al., 1999; Birkmeyer, et al., 2002; Wu, et al., 2004; Peterson et al., 2004).

  5. Limitations of Prior Research: Contribution of Current Study • Is volume exogenous or endogenous? • Use of cross-sectional study design versus longitudinal study design • Generalizability of findings

  6. Study Methods and Data Sources • Research Approach • A longitudinal design: 1995 - 2000 • Data Sources • HCUP-SID (AZ, CA, CO, FL, IA, MD, MA, NJ, NY, WA, WI) • AHA • ARF • InterStudy • Sample • 1,760 nonfederal, general short-term hospitals with at least 6 CABG surgeries a year • 1,200 of them had complete data

  7. Analytical Approach • The model for Practice Makes Perfect • Qualityit = β0+ β1 log( Volumeit )+ β2 Hospitalit + β3 Marketit + β4 IVQit+ β5 Statei + β6 Timeit + θi + εit • The model for Selective Referral • log(Volume)it = γ0 + γ1Qualityit + γ2 Hospitalit + γ3 Marketit + γ4 IVVit + γ5 Statei + γ6 Timeit + Ψi + μit

  8. Measures • Primary Variables of Interest: • Quality: risk-adjusted in-hospital CABG mortality rate; calculated with AHRQ IQI software • Volume: log of the sum of discharges with the procedure ICD-9-CM codes: 3610-3619 • Control Variables • Hospital Characteristics: ownership, teaching status, log (total surgical operations), system/ network affiliation, case-mixed adjusted length of stay • Market factors: log (per capita income) and HMO penetration at the MSA level • State and time dummy variables

  9. Results of Specification Tests • Instruments are valid. • Instruments of volume (IVV): log (size), HHI, and tertiary services. • Instruments of quality (IVQ): • Staffing: RN and LPN per 1,000 inpatient days. • Severity of illness: patient acuity and case mix index. • Hospital-specific component of error exists (i.e., θi ≠0 and Ψi ≠0 ). • Fixed effects found to be preferred estimation method to random effects

  10. Results • Practice makes perfect (DV: mortality) • Selective Referral (DV: log (volume))

  11. Study Limitations • Administrative data used for constructing risk adjusted mortality rates • Strictly examine in-hospital mortality not mortality that occurs after discharge • Lack of data on physician volume • May be that practice makes perfect hypothesis is more relevant for physicians than for hospitals

  12. Study Implications • Longitudinal study design with instruments is recommended in future research on volume-quality relationships • From hospital perspective: • Regionalization of care based on volume thresholds may need to be reconsidered • Competition based on quality may be preferred.

  13. Questions and Suggestions

More Related