What drives centralisation in cancer care?

Melvin J. Kilsdonk* (Corresponding Author), Sabine Siesling, Boukje A.C. van Dijk, Michel W. Wouters, Wim H. van Harten

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)
20 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: To improve quality of care, centralisation of cancer services in high-volume centres has been stimulated. Studies linking specialisation and high (surgical) volumes to better outcomes already appeared in the 1990’s. However, actual centralisation was a difficult process in many countries. In this study, factors influencing the centralisation of cancer services in the Netherlands were determined.

Material and methods: Centralisation patterns were studied for three types of cancer that are known to benefit from high surgical caseloads: oesophagus-, pancreas- and bladder cancer. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided data on tumour and treatment characteristics from 2000–2013 for respectively 8037, 4747 and 6362 patients receiving surgery. By plotting timelines of centralisation of cancer surgery, relations with the appearance of (inter)national scientific evidence, actions of medical specialist societies, specific regulation and other important factors on the degree of centralisation were ascertained.

Results: For oesophagus and pancreas cancer, a gradual increase in centralisation of surgery is seen from 2005 and 2006 onwards following (inter)national scientific evidence. Centralisation steps for bladder cancer surgery can be seen in 2010 and 2013 anticipating on the publication of norms by the professional society. The most influential stimulus seems to have been regulations on minimum volumes.

Conclusion: Scientific evidence on the relationship between volume and outcome lead to the start of centralisation of surgical cancer care in the Netherlands. Once a body of evidence has been established on organisational change that influences professional practice, in addition some form of regulation is needed to ensure widespread implementation.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere0195673
JournalPLoS ONE
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 12 Apr 2018

Fingerprint

Surgery
neoplasms
surgery
Neoplasms
Netherlands
pancreatic neoplasms
Esophageal Neoplasms
Pancreatic Neoplasms
Urinary Bladder Neoplasms
professional societies
Tumors
esophageal neoplasms
Organizational Innovation
Professional Practice
Quality of Health Care
Medical Societies
esophagus
Registries
Publications

Cite this

Kilsdonk, Melvin J. ; Siesling, Sabine ; van Dijk, Boukje A.C. ; Wouters, Michel W. ; van Harten, Wim H. / What drives centralisation in cancer care?. In: PLoS ONE. 2018 ; Vol. 13, No. 4.
@article{15dd7349f2c445e89591541e48aec3cc,
title = "What drives centralisation in cancer care?",
abstract = "Background: To improve quality of care, centralisation of cancer services in high-volume centres has been stimulated. Studies linking specialisation and high (surgical) volumes to better outcomes already appeared in the 1990’s. However, actual centralisation was a difficult process in many countries. In this study, factors influencing the centralisation of cancer services in the Netherlands were determined.Material and methods: Centralisation patterns were studied for three types of cancer that are known to benefit from high surgical caseloads: oesophagus-, pancreas- and bladder cancer. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided data on tumour and treatment characteristics from 2000–2013 for respectively 8037, 4747 and 6362 patients receiving surgery. By plotting timelines of centralisation of cancer surgery, relations with the appearance of (inter)national scientific evidence, actions of medical specialist societies, specific regulation and other important factors on the degree of centralisation were ascertained. Results: For oesophagus and pancreas cancer, a gradual increase in centralisation of surgery is seen from 2005 and 2006 onwards following (inter)national scientific evidence. Centralisation steps for bladder cancer surgery can be seen in 2010 and 2013 anticipating on the publication of norms by the professional society. The most influential stimulus seems to have been regulations on minimum volumes.Conclusion: Scientific evidence on the relationship between volume and outcome lead to the start of centralisation of surgical cancer care in the Netherlands. Once a body of evidence has been established on organisational change that influences professional practice, in addition some form of regulation is needed to ensure widespread implementation.",
author = "Kilsdonk, {Melvin J.} and Sabine Siesling and {van Dijk}, {Boukje A.C.} and Wouters, {Michel W.} and {van Harten}, {Wim H.}",
year = "2018",
month = "4",
day = "12",
doi = "10.1371/journal.pone.0195673",
language = "English",
volume = "13",
journal = "PLoS ONE",
issn = "1932-6203",
publisher = "Public Library of Science",
number = "4",

}

What drives centralisation in cancer care? / Kilsdonk, Melvin J. (Corresponding Author); Siesling, Sabine; van Dijk, Boukje A.C.; Wouters, Michel W.; van Harten, Wim H.

In: PLoS ONE, Vol. 13, No. 4, e0195673, 12.04.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - What drives centralisation in cancer care?

AU - Kilsdonk, Melvin J.

AU - Siesling, Sabine

AU - van Dijk, Boukje A.C.

AU - Wouters, Michel W.

AU - van Harten, Wim H.

PY - 2018/4/12

Y1 - 2018/4/12

N2 - Background: To improve quality of care, centralisation of cancer services in high-volume centres has been stimulated. Studies linking specialisation and high (surgical) volumes to better outcomes already appeared in the 1990’s. However, actual centralisation was a difficult process in many countries. In this study, factors influencing the centralisation of cancer services in the Netherlands were determined.Material and methods: Centralisation patterns were studied for three types of cancer that are known to benefit from high surgical caseloads: oesophagus-, pancreas- and bladder cancer. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided data on tumour and treatment characteristics from 2000–2013 for respectively 8037, 4747 and 6362 patients receiving surgery. By plotting timelines of centralisation of cancer surgery, relations with the appearance of (inter)national scientific evidence, actions of medical specialist societies, specific regulation and other important factors on the degree of centralisation were ascertained. Results: For oesophagus and pancreas cancer, a gradual increase in centralisation of surgery is seen from 2005 and 2006 onwards following (inter)national scientific evidence. Centralisation steps for bladder cancer surgery can be seen in 2010 and 2013 anticipating on the publication of norms by the professional society. The most influential stimulus seems to have been regulations on minimum volumes.Conclusion: Scientific evidence on the relationship between volume and outcome lead to the start of centralisation of surgical cancer care in the Netherlands. Once a body of evidence has been established on organisational change that influences professional practice, in addition some form of regulation is needed to ensure widespread implementation.

AB - Background: To improve quality of care, centralisation of cancer services in high-volume centres has been stimulated. Studies linking specialisation and high (surgical) volumes to better outcomes already appeared in the 1990’s. However, actual centralisation was a difficult process in many countries. In this study, factors influencing the centralisation of cancer services in the Netherlands were determined.Material and methods: Centralisation patterns were studied for three types of cancer that are known to benefit from high surgical caseloads: oesophagus-, pancreas- and bladder cancer. The Netherlands Cancer Registry provided data on tumour and treatment characteristics from 2000–2013 for respectively 8037, 4747 and 6362 patients receiving surgery. By plotting timelines of centralisation of cancer surgery, relations with the appearance of (inter)national scientific evidence, actions of medical specialist societies, specific regulation and other important factors on the degree of centralisation were ascertained. Results: For oesophagus and pancreas cancer, a gradual increase in centralisation of surgery is seen from 2005 and 2006 onwards following (inter)national scientific evidence. Centralisation steps for bladder cancer surgery can be seen in 2010 and 2013 anticipating on the publication of norms by the professional society. The most influential stimulus seems to have been regulations on minimum volumes.Conclusion: Scientific evidence on the relationship between volume and outcome lead to the start of centralisation of surgical cancer care in the Netherlands. Once a body of evidence has been established on organisational change that influences professional practice, in addition some form of regulation is needed to ensure widespread implementation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85045444052&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1371/journal.pone.0195673

DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0195673

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85045444052

VL - 13

JO - PLoS ONE

JF - PLoS ONE

SN - 1932-6203

IS - 4

M1 - e0195673

ER -