| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press.
ARTICLE |
Effect of Surgeon Specialty on Processes of Care and Outcomes for Ovarian Cancer Patients
Affiliations of authors: Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA (CCE, BAN); Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY (DS); Applied Research Program (KRY, JLW), Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program (ELT), National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD; Information Management Services, Inc., Rockville, MD (MT, AF); Department of Gynecologic Oncology, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX (DCB); Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, The Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD (REB); Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Women's Health, Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children, Honolulu, HI (MC)
Correspondence to: Craig C. Earle, MD, MSc, Center for Outcomes and Policy Research, Dana-Farber Cancer Center, 44 Binney St., 454-STE 21–24, Boston, MA 02115 (e-mail: craig_earle{at}dfci.harvard.edu).
Background: For many diseases, specialized care (i.e., care rendered by a specialist) has been associated with superior-quality care (i.e., better outcomes). We examined associations between physician specialty and outcomes in a population-based cohort of elderly ovarian cancer surgery patients. Methods: We analyzed the Medicare claims, by physician specialty, of all women aged 65 years or older who underwent surgery for pathologically confirmed invasive epithelial ovarian cancer between January 1, 1992, and December 31, 1999, while living in an area monitored by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program to assess important care processes (i.e., the appropriate extent of surgery and use of adjuvant chemotherapy) and outcomes (i.e., surgical complications, ostomy rates, and survival). All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: Among 3067 ovarian cancer patients who underwent surgery, 1017 patients (33%) were treated by a gynecologic oncologist, 1377 patients (45%) by a general gynecologist, and 673 patients (22%) by a general surgeon. Among patients with stage I or II disease, those treated by a gynecologic oncologist (60%) were more likely to undergo lymph node dissection than those treated by a general gynecologist (36%) or a general surgeon (16%). Patients with stage III or IV disease were more likely to undergo a debulking procedure if the initial surgery was performed by a gynecologic oncologist (58%) than by a general gynecologist (51%) or a general surgeon (40%; P<.001) and were more likely to receive postoperative chemotherapy when operated on by a gynecologic oncologist (79%) or a general gynecologist (76%) than by a general surgeon (62%, P<.001). Survival among patients operated on by gynecologic oncologists (hazard ratio [HR] of death from any cause = 0.85, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.76 to 0.95) or general gynecologists (HR = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.78 to 0.96) was better than that among patients operated on by general surgeons. Conclusions: Ovarian cancer patients treated by gynecologic oncologists had marginally better outcomes than those treated by general gynecologists and clearly superior outcomes compared with patients treated by general surgeons.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
Editorial about this Article
- Transcending the Volume–Outcome Relationship in Cancer Care
- Joseph Lipscomb
J Natl Cancer Inst 2006 98: 151-154.[Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  H. S. Park, S. A. Roman, and J. A. Sosa Outcomes From 3144 Adrenalectomies in the United States: Which Matters More, Surgeon Volume or Specialty? Arch Surg, November 1, 2009; 144(11): 1060 - 1067. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. P. Curtis, J. J. Luebbert, Y. Wang, S. S. Rathore, J. Chen, P. A. Heidenreich, S. C. Hammill, R. I. Lampert, and H. M. Krumholz Association of Physician Certification and Outcomes Among Patients Receiving an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator JAMA, April 22, 2009; 301(16): 1661 - 1670. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Schrag Enhancing Cancer Registry Data to Promote Rational Health System Design J Natl Cancer Inst, March 19, 2008; 100(6): 378 - 379. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 R. G. Moore and R. C. Bast Jr How Do You Distinguish a Malignant Pelvic Mass From a Benign Pelvic Mass? Imaging, Biomarkers, or None of the Above J. Clin. Oncol., September 20, 2007; 25(27): 4159 - 4161. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. N. Fader and P. G. Rose Role of Surgery in Ovarian Carcinoma J. Clin. Oncol., July 10, 2007; 25(20): 2873 - 2883. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 G. D. Aletti, M. M. Gallenberg, W. A. Cliby, A. Jatoi, and L. C. Hartmann Current Management Strategies for Ovarian Cancer Mayo Clin. Proc., June 1, 2007; 82(6): 751 - 770. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. H. Silber, P. R. Rosenbaum, D. Polsky, R. N. Ross, O. Even-Shoshan, J. S. Schwartz, K. A. Armstrong, and T. C. Randall Does Ovarian Cancer Treatment and Survival Differ by the Specialty Providing Chemotherapy? J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2007; 25(10): 1169 - 1175. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Lipscomb Transcending the Volume-Outcome Relationship in Cancer Care J Natl Cancer Inst, February 1, 2006; 98(3): 151 - 154. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Schrag, C. Earle, F. Xu, K. S. Panageas, K. R. Yabroff, R. E. Bristow, E. L. Trimble, and J. L. Warren Associations Between Hospital and Surgeon Procedure Volumes and Patient Outcomes After Ovarian Cancer Resection J Natl Cancer Inst, February 1, 2006; 98(3): 163 - 171. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|