ATS
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Personal Folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Author home page(s):
Victor A. Ferraris
Right arrow Permission Requests
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ferraris, V. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Ferraris, V. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Esophagus - cancer
Right arrowRelated Article

Ann Thorac Surg 2005;79:217-218
© 2005 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons

INVITED COMMENTARY

Victor A. Ferraris, MD, PhD

University of Kentucky, C-208, UKMC, 800 Rose St, Lexington, KY 40536

The first 20% of the full text of this article appears below.

The article by Dimick and coworkers addresses an important subject that has gained much national lay-press notoriety in recent weeks, that is, the issue of provider volume affecting patient outcomes [1]. This article engendered divergent opinions from reviewers with some reviewers strongly opposed to publication whereas others were not. I suppose this reflects the current uncertainty about the volume–outcome relationship in surgical patients and the article by Dimick and coauthors deserves some comment [1].

These authors use a claims database from the Agency for Health Research and Quality to identify trends in hospital mortality and length of stay for patients undergoing esophagectomy between 1988 and 2000. The authors conclude that improvements in operative mortality at high-volume hospitals are at least partly responsible for an improving trend in outcomes for esophagectomy. There is a trap inherent in using administrative claims databases to reach conclusions that have clinical implications. Because these data are generated for the collection of bills, their clinical accuracy is inadequate, and it is likely that these databases overestimate complications for billing purposes and underestimate the effects of comorbid illness [2–5]. The quality of databases used to generate comparisons cannot be overemphasized.

Mortality after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is the prototypical procedure . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Related Article

National Trends in Outcomes for Esophageal Resection
Justin B. Dimick, Reid M. Wainess, Gilbert R. Upchurch, Jr, Mark D. Iannettoni, and Mark B. Orringer
Ann. Thorac. Surg. 2005 79: 212-216. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
ANN THORAC SURG ASIAN CARDIOVASC THORAC ANN EUR J CARDIOTHORAC SURG
J THORAC CARDIOVASC SURG ICVTS ALL CTSNet JOURNALS
Copyright © 2005 by The Society of Thoracic Surgeons.