High-volume centers have lower costs for some pancreatic surgeries

SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ. – Surgeons who perform five or more pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or Whipple operations per year had significant cost reductions, compared with lower-volume surgeons, but there was no such relationship among surgeons performing distal pancreatectomy procedures.

The finding suggests that “high volume” may need to be defined differently for the two procedures to maximize cost effectiveness.

In the age of increased pressure to reduce health care costs, and with the merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) set to be introduced, referring pancreatic procedures to high-volume centers has the potential to increase efficiency and reduce costs, but researchers are still working to determine how high a volume is required to realize such savings. High volume has been defined by as few as two operations per year and as many as 200, according to Brooke Vuong, MD, who presented the study at at the annual meeting of the Western Surgical Association.

There have been few studies of the impact of surgeon volume on costs and outcomes, and many of those rely on databases and emphasize academic medical centers.

“There was a significant cost reduction for a low-volume threshold of five, so it raises the idea that minimum volume requirements have value,” said Dr. Vuong, who is a surgical oncology fellow at the John Wayne Cancer Institute at Providence Saint John’s Health Center, Santa Monica, Calif.

The study, which is the first to look at detailed costs and value drivers for individual surgeons performing pancreatic surgery, suggests more work needs to be done to determine a high-volume cutoff for distal pancreatectomy (DP). The study, however, also revealed another cost-saving mechanism: After participating surgeons began sharing financial data with each other, overall costs dropped by about 7%.

“The sharing of detailed financial data with [other surgeons] on a regular basis provides the opportunity to evaluate practice patterns and thereby reduce cost, and this is especially important as health care systems and individual physicians are held accountable for value-based care,” Dr. Vuong said.

That point struck a chord with one audience member. “There’s nothing like seeing your data among your peers to drive down your length-of-stay costs and make you pay real attention to complications,” one surgeon said during the Q & A period.

The researchers examined data from procedures performed at 14 hospitals in five different states. The analysis included 54 surgeons and all patients who underwent DP (n = 270) or PD (n = 526) between January 2014 and July 2017. Average length of stay (LOS), 30-day mortality, and readmission rates were collected and compared by surgeon volume. Beginning in 2016, the team conducted bimonthly video conferences to share data in a hepatobiliary clinical performance group.

High-volume surgeons had PD costs of $21,026, compared with $24,706 among low-volume surgeons (difference, $3,680; P = .005). Specific areas of savings included operating room and anesthesia (P = .005); room and board (P = .03), and ICU (P = .042). Average LOS was 9 days among high-volume surgeons, compared with 11 days among low-volume surgeons (P less than .001).

In contrast, the researchers found no significant difference in overall cost between high-volume ($14,016) and low-volume ($15,856) surgeons performing DP, though there was a lower average LOS among high-volume surgeons (6 days vs. 7 days; P = .001). High-volume surgeons also had a lower associated frequency of blood transfusions (10.2% vs. 22.6%; P = .007).

In PD surgeries, low-volume surgeons were more likely to produce a cost in the top quartile than were high-volume surgeons (odds ratio, 6.89; P less than .001). The same was true with DP surgeries (odds ratio, 5.78; P less than .001).

The researchers compared surgical costs from before and after the hepatobiliary clinical performance group was established and found a median decrease of $1,397, from $19,411 in 2014-2015 to $18,014 for 2016 (P = .013).

Readmission rates and 30-day mortality were not significantly different between high-volume and low-volume surgeons in either procedure.

The study received no outside support. Dr. Vuong reported having no financial disclosures..

SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ. – Surgeons who perform five or more pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or Whipple operations per year had significant cost reductions, compared with lower-volume surgeons, but there was no such relationship among surgeons performing distal pancreatectomy procedures.

The finding suggests that “high volume” may need to be defined differently for the two procedures to maximize cost effectiveness.

In the age of increased pressure to reduce health care costs, and with the merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) set to be introduced, referring pancreatic procedures to high-volume centers has the potential to increase efficiency and reduce costs, but researchers are still working to determine how high a volume is required to realize such savings. High volume has been defined by as few as two operations per year and as many as 200, according to Brooke Vuong, MD, who presented the study at at the annual meeting of the Western Surgical Association.

There have been few studies of the impact of surgeon volume on costs and outcomes, and many of those rely on databases and emphasize academic medical centers.

“There was a significant cost reduction for a low-volume threshold of five, so it raises the idea that minimum volume requirements have value,” said Dr. Vuong, who is a surgical oncology fellow at the John Wayne Cancer Institute at Providence Saint John’s Health Center, Santa Monica, Calif.

The study, which is the first to look at detailed costs and value drivers for individual surgeons performing pancreatic surgery, suggests more work needs to be done to determine a high-volume cutoff for distal pancreatectomy (DP). The study, however, also revealed another cost-saving mechanism: After participating surgeons began sharing financial data with each other, overall costs dropped by about 7%.

“The sharing of detailed financial data with [other surgeons] on a regular basis provides the opportunity to evaluate practice patterns and thereby reduce cost, and this is especially important as health care systems and individual physicians are held accountable for value-based care,” Dr. Vuong said.

That point struck a chord with one audience member. “There’s nothing like seeing your data among your peers to drive down your length-of-stay costs and make you pay real attention to complications,” one surgeon said during the Q & A period.

The researchers examined data from procedures performed at 14 hospitals in five different states. The analysis included 54 surgeons and all patients who underwent DP (n = 270) or PD (n = 526) between January 2014 and July 2017. Average length of stay (LOS), 30-day mortality, and readmission rates were collected and compared by surgeon volume. Beginning in 2016, the team conducted bimonthly video conferences to share data in a hepatobiliary clinical performance group.

High-volume surgeons had PD costs of $21,026, compared with $24,706 among low-volume surgeons (difference, $3,680; P = .005). Specific areas of savings included operating room and anesthesia (P = .005); room and board (P = .03), and ICU (P = .042). Average LOS was 9 days among high-volume surgeons, compared with 11 days among low-volume surgeons (P less than .001).

In contrast, the researchers found no significant difference in overall cost between high-volume ($14,016) and low-volume ($15,856) surgeons performing DP, though there was a lower average LOS among high-volume surgeons (6 days vs. 7 days; P = .001). High-volume surgeons also had a lower associated frequency of blood transfusions (10.2% vs. 22.6%; P = .007).

In PD surgeries, low-volume surgeons were more likely to produce a cost in the top quartile than were high-volume surgeons (odds ratio, 6.89; P less than .001). The same was true with DP surgeries (odds ratio, 5.78; P less than .001).

The researchers compared surgical costs from before and after the hepatobiliary clinical performance group was established and found a median decrease of $1,397, from $19,411 in 2014-2015 to $18,014 for 2016 (P = .013).

Readmission rates and 30-day mortality were not significantly different between high-volume and low-volume surgeons in either procedure.

The study received no outside support. Dr. Vuong reported having no financial disclosures..

SCOTTSDALE, ARIZ. – Surgeons who perform five or more pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) or Whipple operations per year had significant cost reductions, compared with lower-volume surgeons, but there was no such relationship among surgeons performing distal pancreatectomy procedures.

The finding suggests that “high volume” may need to be defined differently for the two procedures to maximize cost effectiveness.

In the age of increased pressure to reduce health care costs, and with the merit-based incentive payment system (MIPS) set to be introduced, referring pancreatic procedures to high-volume centers has the potential to increase efficiency and reduce costs, but researchers are still working to determine how high a volume is required to realize such savings. High volume has been defined by as few as two operations per year and as many as 200, according to Brooke Vuong, MD, who presented the study at at the annual meeting of the Western Surgical Association.

There have been few studies of the impact of surgeon volume on costs and outcomes, and many of those rely on databases and emphasize academic medical centers.

“There was a significant cost reduction for a low-volume threshold of five, so it raises the idea that minimum volume requirements have value,” said Dr. Vuong, who is a surgical oncology fellow at the John Wayne Cancer Institute at Providence Saint John’s Health Center, Santa Monica, Calif.

The study, which is the first to look at detailed costs and value drivers for individual surgeons performing pancreatic surgery, suggests more work needs to be done to determine a high-volume cutoff for distal pancreatectomy (DP). The study, however, also revealed another cost-saving mechanism: After participating surgeons began sharing financial data with each other, overall costs dropped by about 7%.

“The sharing of detailed financial data with [other surgeons] on a regular basis provides the opportunity to evaluate practice patterns and thereby reduce cost, and this is especially important as health care systems and individual physicians are held accountable for value-based care,” Dr. Vuong said.

That point struck a chord with one audience member. “There’s nothing like seeing your data among your peers to drive down your length-of-stay costs and make you pay real attention to complications,” one surgeon said during the Q & A period.

The researchers examined data from procedures performed at 14 hospitals in five different states. The analysis included 54 surgeons and all patients who underwent DP (n = 270) or PD (n = 526) between January 2014 and July 2017. Average length of stay (LOS), 30-day mortality, and readmission rates were collected and compared by surgeon volume. Beginning in 2016, the team conducted bimonthly video conferences to share data in a hepatobiliary clinical performance group.

High-volume surgeons had PD costs of $21,026, compared with $24,706 among low-volume surgeons (difference, $3,680; P = .005). Specific areas of savings included operating room and anesthesia (P = .005); room and board (P = .03), and ICU (P = .042). Average LOS was 9 days among high-volume surgeons, compared with 11 days among low-volume surgeons (P less than .001).

In contrast, the researchers found no significant difference in overall cost between high-volume ($14,016) and low-volume ($15,856) surgeons performing DP, though there was a lower average LOS among high-volume surgeons (6 days vs. 7 days; P = .001). High-volume surgeons also had a lower associated frequency of blood transfusions (10.2% vs. 22.6%; P = .007).

In PD surgeries, low-volume surgeons were more likely to produce a cost in the top quartile than were high-volume surgeons (odds ratio, 6.89; P less than .001). The same was true with DP surgeries (odds ratio, 5.78; P less than .001).

The researchers compared surgical costs from before and after the hepatobiliary clinical performance group was established and found a median decrease of $1,397, from $19,411 in 2014-2015 to $18,014 for 2016 (P = .013).

Readmission rates and 30-day mortality were not significantly different between high-volume and low-volume surgeons in either procedure.

The study received no outside support. Dr. Vuong reported having no financial disclosures..