Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 Jul 22:15:279.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-0944-7.

Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis

Affiliations

Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis

Werner de Cruppé et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: Compliance with minimum volume standards for specific procedures serves as a criterion for high-quality patient care. International experiences report a centralization of the respective procedures. In Germany, minimum volume standards for hospitals were introduced in 2004 for 5 procedures (complex esophageal and pancreatic interventions; liver, kidney and stem cell transplantations), in 2006 total knee replacement was added. This study explores whether any centralization is discernible for these procedures in Germany.

Methods: A retrospective longitudinal analysis of secondary data serves to determine a possible centralization of procedures from the system perspective. Centralization means that over time, fewer hospitals perform the respective procedure, the case volume in high-volume hospitals increases together with their percentage of the annual total case volume, and the case volume in low-volume hospitals decreases together with their percentage of the annual total case volume. Using data from the mandatory hospital quality reports for the years 2006, 2008 and 2010 we performed Kruskal Wallis and chi-square tests to evaluate potential centralization effects.

Results: No centralization was found for any of the six types of interventions over the period from 2006 to 2010. The annual case volume and the number of hospitals performing interventions rose at differing rates over the 5-year period depending on the type of intervention. Seven percent of esophagectomies and 14% of pancreatectomies are still performed in hospitals with less than 10 interventions per year.

Conclusions: For the purpose of further centralization of interventions it will be necessary to first analyze and then appropriately address the reasons for non-compliance from the hospital and patient perspective.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Pieper D, Mathes T, Neugebauer E, Eikermann M. State of evidence on the relationship between high-volume hospitals and outcomes in surgery: A systematic review of systematic reviews. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;216:1015–1025.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2012.12.049. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Birkmeyer JD, Siewers AE, Finlayson EVA, Stukel TA, Lucas FL, Batista I, et al. Hospital volume and surgical mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:1128–37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsa012337. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Birkmeyer JD, Sun Y, Wong SL, Stukel TA. Hospital volume and late survival after cancer surgery. Ann Surg. 2007;245:777–83. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000252402.33814.dd. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Fareed N. Size matters: a meta-analysis on the impact of hospital size on patient mortality. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2012;10:103–11. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2012.00264.x. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Dimick JB, Birkmeyer JD, Jr, Upchurch GR., Jr Measuring surgical quality: What’s the role of provider volume? World J Surg. 2005;29:1217–21. doi: 10.1007/s00268-005-7989-4. - DOI - PubMed