• About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Login
    • ObGFirst
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • COVID-19
About Us Contact Us Login ObGFirst
  • Alerts
  • OB
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • GrandRounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • COVID-19
Grand Rounds

Are Ovarian Cancer Outcomes Better at High Volume Centers?

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite

PURPOSE:

  • When assessing ovarian cancer survival, both hospital and physician procedural volume are associated with improved outcomes
  • Following recommended guidelines is also associated with improved outcomes
  • The purpose of this study by Wright et al. (Obstetrics & Gynecology, 2017) was to determine the relative importance of hospital volume compared to complying with standards and guidelines

METHODS:

  • Retrospective cohort study using the National Cancer Database
  • Invasive epithelial ovarian cancer diagnosed from 2004 to 2013
  • Annualized hospital volume based total number of patients divided by the years in which a given hospital treated at least one patient
  • Volume definitions (annual)
    • High-volume hospital: 20 cases or greater
    • High- to intermediate-volume hospital: 9.01–19.9 cases
    • Intermediate-volume hospital: 5.01–9 cases
    • Intermediate-low hospital: 2.01–5 cases
    • Low-volume hospital: ≤ 2 cases
  • Primary outcome of the analysis was overall survival at 2 and 5 years

RESULTS:

  • 100,725 patients treated at 1,268 hospitals were identified
  • Compliance with the composite, overall quality metric was noted in 64.2% (SD 24.5%) of low-volume centers and increased with each volume category to 82.2% (SD 7.7%) at the highest volume hospitals
  • Two-year adjusted survival rose sequentially from 64.4% (95% CI 62.5–66.4%) at low-volume hospitals to 77.4% (95% CI 77.0–77.8%) at high-volume hospitals (P<.001)
  • Two-year adjusted survival rose sequentially from 66.5% (95% CI 65.5–67.5%) at low-quality hospitals to 77.3% (95% CI 76.8–77.7%) at high-quality hospitals (P<.001)
  • Similar findings (survival increased with volume and adherence to standards) were observed for 5-year rates
  • When controlling for each hospital volume category, survival increased with increasing quality
    • Adjusted 2-year survival was 61.4% (95% CI 58.4–64.5%) at hospitals with the lowest adherence to quality metrics and rose to 65.8% (95% CI 61.2–70.8%) at the hospitals with highest adherence to the quality metrics (P<.001)
    • Lower volume hospitals with higher quality scores still had survival that was lower than higher volume hospitals

CONCLUSION:

  • Best outcomes were still seen at high-volume hospitals and therefore referral to these centers for ovarian cancer care is reasonable
  • However, for practical reasons, low-volume hospitals may still serve an important role and targeting quality improvement and adherence to standards may improve outcomes

Learn More – Primary Sources:

Association of Hospital Volume and Quality of Care With Survival for Ovarian Cancer

image_pdfFavoriteLoadingFavorite

< Previous
All Grand Rounds Posts
Next >

Related ObG Topics:

Obstetrics Critical Care Course
Screening for Ovarian Cancer – Fantasy or Reality?
Ovarian or Endometrial Cancer? Consider Lynch Syndrome

Sections

  • Alerts
  • OB
  • GYN
    • GYN
    • Sexual Health
  • 2T US Atlas
  • The Genome
  • Primary Care
  • Your Practice
  • Grand Rounds
  • My Bookshelf
  • COVID-19

Are you an
ObG Insider?

Get specially curated clinical summaries delivered to your inbox every week for free

  • Site Map/
  • © ObG Project/
  • Terms and Conditions/
  • Privacy/
  • Contact Us/
© ObG Project
SSL Certificate


  • Already an ObGFirst Member?
    Welcome back

    Log In

    Want to sign up?
    Get guideline notifications
    CME Included

    Sign Up

Sign In

Lost your password?

Sign Up for ObGFirst and Stay Ahead

  • - Professional guideline notifications
  • - Daily summary of a clinically relevant
    research paper
  • - Includes 1 hour of CME every month

ObGFirst Free Trial

Already a Member of ObGFirst®?

Please log in to ObGFirst to access the 2T US Atlas

Password Trouble?

Not an ObGFirst® Member Yet?

  • - Access 2T US Atlas
  • - Guideline notifications
  • - Daily research paper summaries
  • - And lots more!
ObGFirst Free Trial

Media - Internet

Computer System Requirements

OBG Project CME requires a modern web browser (Internet Explorer 10+, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Microsoft Edge). Certain educational activities may require additional software to view multimedia, presentation, or printable versions of their content. These activities will be marked as such and will provide links to the required software. That software may be: Adobe Flash, Apple QuickTime, Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft PowerPoint, Windows Media Player, or Real Networks Real One Player.

Disclosure of Unlabeled Use

This educational activity may contain discussion of published and/or investigational uses of agents that are not indicated by the FDA. The planners of this activity do not recommend the use of any agent outside of the labeled indications.

The opinions expressed in the educational activity are those of the faculty and do not necessarily represent the views of the planners. Please refer to the official prescribing information for each product for discussion of approved indications, contraindications, and warnings.

Disclaimer

Participants have an implied responsibility to use the newly acquired information to enhance patient outcomes and their own professional development. The information
presented in this activity is not meant to serve as a guideline for patient management. Any procedures, medications, or other courses of diagnosis or treatment discussed or suggested in this activity should not be used by clinicians without evaluation of their patient’s conditions and possible contraindications and/or dangers in use, review of any applicable manufacturer’s product information, and comparison with recommendations of other authorities.

Jointly provided by

NOT ENOUGH CME HOURS

It appears you don't have enough CME Hours to take this Post-Test. Feel free to buy additional CME hours or upgrade your current CME subscription plan

Subscribe

JOIN OBGFIRST AND GET CME/CE CREDITS

One of the benefits of an ObGFirst subscription is the ability to earn CME/CE credits from the ObG entries you read. Tap the button to learn more about ObGFirst

Learn More
Leaving ObG Website

You are now leaving the ObG website and on your way to PRIORITY at UCSF, an independent website. Therefore, we are not responsible for the content or availability of this site