TY - JOUR
T1 - Minimally Invasive Surgery Rate as a Quality Metric for Endometrial Cancer
AU - Polan, Rosa M.
AU - Tanner, Edward J.
AU - Barber, Emma L.
N1 - Funding Information:
Dr. Barber is supported by National Institutes of Health K12 HD050121-12.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 AAGL
PY - 2020/9/1
Y1 - 2020/9/1
N2 - Study Objective: To determine the frequency with which Commission on Cancer–accredited hospitals met a metric of ≥80% minimally invasively performed hysterectomies for endometrial cancer and to compare the clinical outcomes of hospitals meeting this metric with those that did not. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Hospitals caring for ≥20 endometrial cancer patients per year recorded in the National Cancer Database in 2015 were included. Patients: Women who had undergone hysterectomy for endometrial cancer and had an epithelial histology, a Charlson comorbidity score of 0, and stage I to III disease. Intervention: Patient characteristics, patterns of care, and outcomes were compared between hospitals performing ≥80% minimally invasive hysterectomies and hospitals not meeting this metric. Measurements and Main Results: The hospitals (n = 510) treated 20 670 women with endometrial cancer. In 283 (55%) hospitals ≥80% of hysterectomies were minimally invasively performed (high–minimally invasive surgery [MIS] hospitals, overall MIS rate 89%). In the 227 hospitals that did not meet this metric, 61% of hysterectomies for endometrial cancer were performed using a minimally invasive approach. In high–MIS hospitals, patients were more likely to be white (87% vs 82%, p<.001), privately insured (53% vs 49%, p <.001), and have stage I disease (84% vs 82%, p = .002) and an endometrioid histology (79% vs 76%, p <.001). Surgery was more often performed robotically (80% vs 71%), and conversion to laparotomy was less likely (1.5% vs 3.2%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39–0.57) (both p <.001). Patients treated at high–MIS hospitals were more likely to have undergone lymph node assessment at the time of surgery (76% vs 69%; aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.35–1.53) and been discharged on the same or next day (74% vs 57%; aOR, 2.27; 95% CI, 2.13–2.42) and were less likely to have an unplanned 30-day readmission (1.8% vs 2.9%; aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53–0.77). Conclusion: An MIS rate of ≥80% for endometrial cancer is feasible on a national scale and is associated with other hospital-level measurements of high-quality care.
AB - Study Objective: To determine the frequency with which Commission on Cancer–accredited hospitals met a metric of ≥80% minimally invasively performed hysterectomies for endometrial cancer and to compare the clinical outcomes of hospitals meeting this metric with those that did not. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Hospitals caring for ≥20 endometrial cancer patients per year recorded in the National Cancer Database in 2015 were included. Patients: Women who had undergone hysterectomy for endometrial cancer and had an epithelial histology, a Charlson comorbidity score of 0, and stage I to III disease. Intervention: Patient characteristics, patterns of care, and outcomes were compared between hospitals performing ≥80% minimally invasive hysterectomies and hospitals not meeting this metric. Measurements and Main Results: The hospitals (n = 510) treated 20 670 women with endometrial cancer. In 283 (55%) hospitals ≥80% of hysterectomies were minimally invasively performed (high–minimally invasive surgery [MIS] hospitals, overall MIS rate 89%). In the 227 hospitals that did not meet this metric, 61% of hysterectomies for endometrial cancer were performed using a minimally invasive approach. In high–MIS hospitals, patients were more likely to be white (87% vs 82%, p<.001), privately insured (53% vs 49%, p <.001), and have stage I disease (84% vs 82%, p = .002) and an endometrioid histology (79% vs 76%, p <.001). Surgery was more often performed robotically (80% vs 71%), and conversion to laparotomy was less likely (1.5% vs 3.2%, adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39–0.57) (both p <.001). Patients treated at high–MIS hospitals were more likely to have undergone lymph node assessment at the time of surgery (76% vs 69%; aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.35–1.53) and been discharged on the same or next day (74% vs 57%; aOR, 2.27; 95% CI, 2.13–2.42) and were less likely to have an unplanned 30-day readmission (1.8% vs 2.9%; aOR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.53–0.77). Conclusion: An MIS rate of ≥80% for endometrial cancer is feasible on a national scale and is associated with other hospital-level measurements of high-quality care.
KW - Endometrial cancer
KW - Minimally invasive surgery
KW - Quality metric
KW - Surgical quality
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85076526370&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85076526370&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.10.011
DO - 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.10.011
M3 - Article
C2 - 31655129
AN - SCOPUS:85076526370
SN - 1553-4650
VL - 27
SP - 1389
EP - 1394
JO - Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists
JF - Journal of the American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists
IS - 6
ER -