↓ Skip to main content

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

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Health Services Research, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Minimum volume standards in German hospitals: do they get along with procedure centralization? A retrospective longitudinal data analysis
Published in
BMC Health Services Research, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12913-015-0944-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Werner de Cruppé, Marc Malik, Max Geraedts

Abstract

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. 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. 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. 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.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 31 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 3 9%
Researcher 3 9%
Student > Master 3 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Other 8 25%
Unknown 11 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 10 31%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 13 41%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,418,919
of 22,817,213 outputs
Outputs from BMC Health Services Research
#6,473
of 7,636 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#189,670
of 263,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Health Services Research
#99
of 110 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,817,213 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,636 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.7. This one is in the 6th percentile – i.e., 6% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 263,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 110 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.