Association of US News & World Report Top Ranking for Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Operation With Patient Outcomes in Abdominal Procedures | Gastroenterology | JAMA Surgery | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 18.206.177.17. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Olmsted MG, Geisen E, Murphy J, et al. Methodology. US News & World Report 2017-18 best hospitals: specialty rankings. https://www.usnews.com/static/documents/health/best-hospitals/BH_Methodology_2017-18.pdf. Published September 7, 2017. Accessed October 5, 2018.
2.
Pope  DG.  Reacting to rankings: evidence from “America’s Best Hospitals”.  J Health Econ. 2009;28(6):1154-1165. doi:10.1016/j.jhealeco.2009.08.006PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Wang  DE, Wadhera  RK, Bhatt  DL.  Association of rankings with cardiovascular outcomes at top-ranked hospitals vs nonranked hospitals in the United States.  [published online November 28, 2018].  JAMA Cardiol. 2018. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2018.3951PubMedGoogle Scholar
4.
Vizient Inc. Co website. https://www.vizientinc.com/. Accessed July 10, 2018.
5.
Chen  J, Radford  MJ, Wang  Y, Marciniak  TA, Krumholz  HM.  Do “America’s Best Hospitals” perform better for acute myocardial infarction?  N Engl J Med. 1999;340(4):286-292. doi:10.1056/NEJM199901283400407PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Williams  SC, Koss  RG, Morton  DJ, Loeb  JM.  Performance of top-ranked heart care hospitals on evidence-based process measures.  Circulation. 2006;114(6):558-564. doi:10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.105.600973PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Osborne  NH, Ghaferi  AA, Nicholas  LH, Dimick  JB, Mph  M.  Evaluating popular media and internet-based hospital quality ratings for cancer surgery.  Arch Surg. 2011;146(5):600-604. doi:10.1001/archsurg.2011.119PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Koh  CY, Inaba  CS, Sujatha-Bhaskar  S, Nguyen  NT.  Association of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Overall Hospital Quality Star Rating with outcomes in advanced laparoscopic abdominal surgery.  JAMA Surg. 2017;152(12):1113-1117. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2017.2212PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Gani  F, Hundt  J, Daniel  M, Efron  JE, Makary  MA, Pawlik  TM.  Variations in hospitals costs for surgical procedures: inefficient care or sick patients?  Am J Surg. 2017;213(1):1-9. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.05.007PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Huber  TS, Carlton  LM, O’Hern  DG,  et al.  Financial impact of tertiary care in an academic medical center.  Ann Surg. 2000;231(6):860-868. doi:10.1097/00000658-200006000-00010PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Toomey  PG, Teta  AF, Patel  KD, Ross  SB, Rosemurgy  AS.  High-volume surgeons vs high-volume hospitals: are best outcomes more due to who or where?  Am J Surg. 2016;211(1):59-63. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2015.08.021PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Nguyen  NT, Paya  M, Stevens  CM, Mavandadi  S, Zainabadi  K, Wilson  SE.  The relationship between hospital volume and outcome in bariatric surgery at academic medical centers.  Ann Surg. 2004;240(4):586-593.PubMedGoogle Scholar
13.
Gould  JC, Kent  KC, Wan  Y, Rajamanickam  V, Leverson  G, Campos  GM.  Perioperative safety and volume: outcomes relationships in bariatric surgery: a study of 32,000 patients.  J Am Coll Surg. 2011;213(6):771-777. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2011.09.006PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Sehgal  AR.  The role of reputation in US News & World Report’s rankings of the top 50 American hospitals.  Ann Intern Med. 2010;152(8):521-525. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-152-8-201004200-00009PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Prasad  V, Goldstein  JA.  US News & World Report cancer hospital rankings: do they reflect measures of research productivity?  PLoS One. 2014;9(9):e107803. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0107803PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
16.
Ingram  DG, Bachrach  BE.  US News & World Report’s rankings of the top 50 children’s hospitals for diabetes and endocrinology reflect reputation more than objective measures.  J Pediatr Endocrinol Metab. 2011;24(9-10):759-761. doi:10.1515/JPEM.2011.293PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
17.
Lascano  D, Finkelstein  JB, Barlow  LJ,  et al.  The correlation of media ranking’s “best” hospitals and surgical outcomes following radical cystectomy for urothelial cancer.  Urology. 2015;86(6):1104-1112. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2015.07.049PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
ACS National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. ACS NSQIP meritorious hospitals. https://www.facs.org/quality-programs/acs-nsqip/meritorious. Accessed August 15, 2018.
19.
Raghuram  AC, Dasari  TK, Chou  B,  et al.  Confusion instead of clarity: publicly reported cardiac surgery ratings for coronary artery bypass grafting and aortic valve replacement.  J Am Coll Surg. 2019;228(2):180-187. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2018.07.663PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Limit 200 characters
Limit 25 characters
Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.

Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.

Err on the side of full disclosure.

If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.

Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.

Limit 140 characters
Limit 3600 characters or approximately 600 words
    Original Investigation
    Pacific Coast Surgical Association
    July 31, 2019

    Association of US News & World Report Top Ranking for Gastroenterology and Gastrointestinal Operation With Patient Outcomes in Abdominal Procedures

    Author Affiliations
    • 1Department of Surgery, University of California Irvine Medical Center, Orange, California
    JAMA Surg. 2019;154(9):861-866. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2019.2327
    Key Points

    Question  Are the hospitals included in the US News & World Report annual rankings of the best in gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgical procedures associated with improvements in patient outcomes in common advanced laparoscopic abdominal operation compared with nonranked hospitals?

    Findings  In this administrative database study of 51 869 abdominal operations, the annual case volume was 397 at top-ranked hospitals compared with 114 at nonranked hospitals. No statistically significant differences in serious morbidity or in-hospital mortality were found between these cohorts.

    Meaning  Within the context of academic centers, top-ranked hospitals performed a higher number of laparoscopic abdominal operations, but improved patient outcomes after these procedures did not appear to be associated with hospital ranking.

    Abstract

    Importance  The US News & World Report (USNWR) annual ranking of the best hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal operations provides guidance and referral of care for medical and surgical gastrointestinal conditions.

    Objective  To investigate whether USNWR top-ranked hospitals for gastroenterology and gastrointestinal surgical procedures are associated with improvements in patient outcomes, compared with nonranked hospitals, in common advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations.

    Design, Setting, and Participants  This study used the Vizient database, which contains administrative, clinical, and financial inpatient information of index hospitalizations for US academic centers and their affiliated hospitals that are members of Vizient. Data were obtained on advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations performed from January 1, 2017, through December 31, 2017, at USNWR top-ranked hospitals (n = 16 296 operations) and nonranked hospitals (n = 35 573 operations). Abdominal operations included bariatric, colorectal, and hiatal hernia procedures. Operations on patients younger than 18 years, emergent cases, conversion cases, and patients with extreme severity of illness were excluded.

    Main Outcomes and Measures  Outcome measures included in-hospital mortality, mortality index (observed to expected mortality ratio), serious morbidity, length of stay, and cost.

    Results  A total of 51 869 advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations were performed at 351 academic health centers and their community affiliates. Of these procedures, 16 296 (31.4%) were performed at 41 top-ranked hospitals and 35 573 (68.6%) at 310 nonranked hospitals. The annual case volume at top-ranked hospitals was 397 compared with 114 at nonranked hospitals. Between top-ranked and nonranked hospitals, no significant differences were found in in-hospital mortality (0.04% vs 0.07%; P = .33) or serious morbidity (1.06% vs 1.02%; P = .75). Compared with nonranked hospitals, advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations performed at top-ranked hospitals had higher mean costs ($7128 [$4917] vs $7742 [$6787]; P < .01) and longer mean lengths of stay (2.38 [2.60] days vs 2.73 [3.31] days; P < .01).

    Conclusions and Relevance  Although, among academic centers, the annual volume of advanced laparoscopic abdominal operations was 3-fold higher for USNWR top-ranked hospitals compared with nonranked hospitals, the volume did not appear to be associated with improved patient outcomes.

    ×