This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (2)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

To the Editor: In their study on the influence of hospital volume and surgical volume on 30-day mortality after major operative procedures in patients with cancer, Dr Begg and colleagues¹ attempt to address a complex and difficult task with an elegant approach. However, this study cannot address 1 important association of quality outcome.

While a high-volume center is more likely to achieve better outcome, excellent outcome is still feasible in low-volume centers under certain circumstances. For instance, Begg et al list zero mortality after pancreatectomy in 5 hospitals with only 5 patients each during the study interval of 10 years. At the City of Hope National Medical Center, a "low-volume" institution according to a definition offered by Lieberman et al,² 54 patients have undergone partial or total pancreatectomy between 1988 and 1998, including 50 for a diagnosis of cancer. Nine surgeons performed a median of 6 such procedures during this . . . [Full Text of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

Impact of Hospital Volume on Operative Mortality for Major Cancer Surgery
Colin B. Begg, Laura D. Cramer, William J. Hoskins, and Murray F. Brennan
JAMA. 1998;280(20):1747-1751.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT