The Stability of Physician-Specific Episode Costs for Urologic Cancer Surgery: Implications for Urologists Under the Merit-Based Incentive Program.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the stability of physician-specific episode payments for prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy in the context of value-based purchasing programs, such as the merit-based incentive payment system. METHODS: We utilized Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results-Medicare data to identify patients aged 66-99 who underwent a prostatectomy, nephrectomy, or cystectomy from 2008 to 2012. We calculated each surgeon's average 90-day episode payment by procedure. Next, we examined payment differences between the most and least expensive quartile providers. For the most expensive quartile of physicians in 2010, we examined their spending quartile in 2011. Finally, we evaluated the correlation in spending over time and across procedures. RESULTS: We identified 14,585 patients who underwent surgery by one of 1895 unique clinicians. Differences in payments between the highest and lowest quartiles were $5881, $17,714, and $40,288 for prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy, respectively. Only 39%, 16%, and 13% of physicians that were in the highest spending quartile for prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy in 2010 were also in the most expensive quartile in 2011. Although we observed weak correlation in year-to-year spending for prostatectomy (0.108, P = .033 to .270, P < .001), annual payments for nephrectomy and cystectomy were not significantly correlated. Finally, there was minimal correlation in surgeon spending across procedures. CONCLUSION: There is wide variation in physician-specific episode payments for prostatectomy, nephrectomy, and cystectomy. However, physician spending patterns are not stable over time or across procedures, raising concerns about the ability of the cost-based measures in merit-based incentive payment system to change physician behavior and reliably distinguish those providing less efficient or lower quality care.

System-Level Health-Care Integration and the Costs of Cancer Care Across the Disease Continuum.

PURPOSE: Policy reforms in the Affordable Care Act encourage health care integration to improve quality and lower costs. We examined the association between system-level integration and longitudinal costs of cancer care. METHODS: We used linked SEER-Medicare data to identify patients age 66 to 99 years diagnosed with prostate, bladder, esophageal, pancreatic, lung, liver, kidney, colorectal, breast, or ovarian cancer from 2007 to 2012. We attributed each patient to one or more phases of care (ie, initial, continuing, and end of life) according to time from diagnosis until death or end of study interval. For each phase, we aggregated all claims with the primary cancer diagnosis and identified patients treated in an integrated delivery network (IDN), as defined by the Becker Hospital Review list of the top 100 most integrated health delivery systems. We then determined if care provided in an IDN was associated with decreased payments across cancers and for each individual cancer by phase and across phases. RESULTS: We identified 428,300 patients diagnosed with one of 10 common cancers. Overall, there were no differences in phase-based payments between IDNs and non-IDNs. Average adjusted annual payments by phase for IDN versus non-IDNs were as follows: initial, $14,194 versus $14,421, respectively ( P = .672); continuing, $2,051 versus $2,099 ( P = .566); and end of life, $16,257 versus $16,232 ( P = .948). However, in select cancers, we observed lower payments in IDNs. For bladder cancer, payments at the end of life were lower for IDNs ($11,041 v $12,331; P = .008). Of the four cancers with the lowest 5-year survival rates (ie, pancreatic, lung, esophageal, and liver), average expenditures during the initial and continuing-care phases were lower for patients with liver cancer treated in IDNs. CONCLUSION: For patients with one of 10 common malignancies, treatment in an IDN generally is not associated with lower costs during any phase of cancer care.

Evaluation of a needle disinfectant technique to reduce infection-related hospitalisation after transrectal prostate biopsy.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether a needle disinfectant step during transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS)-guided prostate biopsy is associated with lower rates of infection-related hospitalisation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all TRUS-guided prostate biopsies taken across the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) from January 2012 to March 2015. Natural variation in technique allowed us to evaluate for differences in infection-related hospitalisations based on whether or not a needle disinfectant technique was used. The disinfectant technique was an intra-procedural step to cleanse the biopsy needle with antibacterial solution after each core was sampled (i.e., 10% formalin or 70% isopropyl alcohol). After grouping biopsies according to whether or not the procedure included a needle disinfectant step, we compared the rate of infection-related hospitalisations within 30 days of biopsy. Generalised estimating equation models were fit to adjust for potential confounders. RESULTS: During the evaluated period, 17 954 TRUS-guided prostate biopsies were taken with 5 321 (29.6%) including a disinfectant step. The observed rate of infection-related hospitalisation was lower when a disinfectant technique was used during biopsy (0.60% vs 0.90%; P = 0.04). After accounting for differences between groups the adjusted hospitalisation rate in the disinfectant group was 0.85% vs 1.12% in the no disinfectant group (adjusted odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.50-1.15; P = 0.19). CONCLUSIONS: In this observational analysis, hospitalisations for infectious complications were less common when the TRUS-guided prostate biopsy included a needle disinfection step. However, after adjusting for potential confounders the effect of needle disinfection was not statistically significant. Prospective evaluation is warranted to determine if this step provides a scalable and effective method to minimise infectious complications.

Association of Delivery System Integration and Outcomes for Major Cancer Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Integrated delivery systems (IDSs) are postulated to reduce spending and improve outcomes through successful coordination of care across multiple providers. Nonetheless, the actual impact of IDSs on outcomes for complex multidisciplinary care such as major cancer surgery is largely unknown. METHODS: Using 2011-2013 Medicare data, this study identified patients who underwent surgical resection for prostate, bladder, esophageal, pancreatic, lung, liver, kidney, colorectal, or ovarian cancer. Rates of readmission, 30-day mortality, surgical complications, failure to rescue, and prolonged hospital stay for cancer surgery were compared between patients receiving care at IDS hospitals and those receiving care at non-IDS hospitals. Generalized estimating equations were used to adjust results by cancer type and patient- and hospital-level characteristics while accounting for clustering of patients within hospitals. RESULTS: The study identified 380,053 patients who underwent major resection of cancer, with 38% receiving care at an IDS. Outcomes did not differ between IDS and non-IDS hospitals regarding readmission and surgical complication rates, whereas only minor differences were observed for 30-day mortality (3.5% vs 3.2% for IDS; p < 0.001) and prolonged hospital stay (9.9% vs 9.2% for IDS; p < 0.001). However, after adjustment for patient and hospital characteristics, the frequencies of adverse perioperative outcomes were not significantly associated with IDS status. CONCLUSIONS: The collective findings suggest that local delivery system integration alone does not necessarily have an impact on perioperative outcomes in surgical oncology. Moving forward, stakeholders may need to focus on surgical and oncology-specific methods of care coordination and quality improvement initiatives to improve outcomes for patients undergoing cancer surgery.

Episode-based Payment Variation for Urologic Cancer Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate payment variation for 3 common urologic cancer surgeries and evaluate the potential for applying bundled payment programs to these procedures. METHODS: Using 2008-2011 Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare linked data, we identified all beneficiaries aged greater than 65 years who underwent cystectomy, prostatectomy, or nephrectomy for cancer. Total episode payments were determined by aggregating hospital, professional, and post-acute care claims from the index surgical hospitalization through 90 days post discharge. Total episode payments were then compared to examine hospital level-variation within each procedure type and the specific payment components (ie, index hospitalization, professional, readmission, and post-acute care) driving spending variation. RESULTS: Ninety-day episodes of care were identified for 1849 cystectomies, 8770 prostatectomies, and 4304 nephrectomies. We observed wide variation in mean episode payments for all 3 conditions (cystectomy mean $35,102: range $24,112-$57,238, prostatectomy mean $10,803: range $8,816-$17,877, nephrectomy mean $17,475: range $11,681-$26,711). Majority of payment variation was attributable to index hospitalization and post-acute care for cystectomy and nephrectomy and professional payments for prostatectomy. The most expensive hospitals by procedure each demonstrated a unique opportunity for spending reduction due to individual differences in component payment patterns between hospitals. CONCLUSION: Ninety-day episode payments for urologic cancer surgery vary widely across hospitals in the United States. The key drivers of this payment variation differ for individual procedures and hospitals. Accordingly, hospitals will need individualized data and clinical re-design strategies to succeed with implementation of episode-based payment models for urologic cancer care.

Association Between Patient Satisfaction and Short-Term Outcomes After Major Cancer Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether patient satisfaction, as measured by the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, is associated with short-term outcomes after major cancer surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We first used national Medicare claims to identify patients who underwent a major extirpative cancer surgery from 2011 to 2013. Next, we used Hospital Compare data to assign the HCAHPS score to the hospital where the patient underwent surgery. We then performed univariate statistical analyses and fit multilevel logistic regression models to evaluate the relationship between excellent patient satisfaction and short-term cancer surgery outcomes for all surgery types combined and then by each individual surgery type. RESULTS: We identified 373,692 patients who underwent major cancer surgery for one of nine cancers at 2617 hospitals. In both unadjusted and adjusted analyses, hospitals with higher proportions of patients reporting excellent satisfaction had lower complication rates (p < 0.001), readmissions (p < 0.001), mortality (p < 0.001), and prolonged length of stay (p < 0.001) than hospitals with lower proportions of satisfied patients, but with modest differences. This finding held true broadly across individual cancer types for complications, mortality, and prolonged length of stay, but less so for readmissions. CONCLUSIONS: Hospital-wide excellent patient satisfaction scores are associated with short-term outcomes after major cancer surgery overall, but are modest in magnitude.

Understanding the relationship between the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' Hospital Compare star rating, surgical case volume, and short-term outcomes after major cancer surgery.

BACKGROUND: Both the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services' (CMS) Hospital Compare star rating and surgical case volume have been publicized as metrics that can help patients to identify high-quality hospitals for complex care such as cancer surgery. The current study evaluates the relationship between the CMS' star rating, surgical volume, and short-term outcomes after major cancer surgery. METHODS: National Medicare data were used to evaluate the relationship between hospital star ratings and cancer surgery volume quintiles. Then, multilevel logistic regression models were fit to examine the association between cancer surgery outcomes and both star rankings and surgical volumes. Lastly, a graphical approach was used to compare how well star ratings and surgical volume predicted cancer surgery outcomes. RESULTS: This study identified 365,752 patients undergoing major cancer surgery for 1 of 9 cancer types at 2,550 hospitals. Star rating was not associated with surgical volume (P < .001). However, both the star rating and surgical volume were correlated with 4 short-term cancer surgery outcomes (mortality, complication rate, readmissions, and prolonged length of stay). The adjusted predicted probabilities for 5- and 1-star hospitals were 2.3% and 4.5% for mortality, 39% and 48% for complications, 10% and 15% for readmissions, and 8% and 16% for a prolonged length of stay, respectively. The adjusted predicted probabilities for hospitals with the highest and lowest quintile cancer surgery volumes were 2.7% and 5.8% for mortality, 41% and 55% for complications, 12.2% and 11.6% for readmissions, and 9.4% and 13% for a prolonged length of stay, respectively. Furthermore, surgical volume and the star rating were similarly associated with mortality and complications, whereas the star rating was more highly associated with readmissions and prolonged length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: In the absence of other information, these findings suggest that the star rating may be useful to patients when they are selecting a hospital for major cancer surgery. However, more research is needed before these ratings can supplant surgical volume as a measure of surgical quality. Cancer 2017;123:4259-4267. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Utilization and Outcomes of Inpatient Surgery at Safety-Net Hospitals.

Funding changes enacted with health care reform may compromise care and outcomes for vulnerable populations undergoing surgery in safety-net hospitals (SNHs). We performed a retrospective cohort study of surgical patients from 2007 through 2011. We examined the distribution of surgical procedures for SNHs (quartile of hospitals with the highest proportion of Medicaid plus self-pay discharges) vs. non-SNHs (lowest quartile). We fit multivariable models to compare in-hospital mortality, prolonged length of stay (LOS), and hospital costs at SNHs vs. non-SNHs. More gynecologic (C-section 10.6% of all procedures at SNH vs. 5.8% non-SNH, p < .001) and fewer orthopedic procedures (joint replacement 4.4% vs. 9.9%, spinal fusion 4.3% vs. 7.1%, p < .001) are performed at SNHs. Across nearly all procedures studied, adjusted inpatient mortality and prolonged LOS were higher at SNHs, while costs remained similar. Further reductions in funding as a consequence of health care reform may threaten access and exacerbate existing health disparities.

Trends in Inpatient Urological Surgery Practice Patterns.

INTRODUCTION: As the nation's population ages and the number of practicing urologists per capita declines, characterization of practice patterns is essential to understand the current state of the urological workforce and anticipate future needs. Accordingly, we examined trends in adult inpatient urological surgery practice patterns over a five-year period. METHODS: We used the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) data from 2005 through 2009 to identify both surgeons and urological surgeries. We classified the latter into 1 of 7 clinical domains (Endourology & Stone Disease, Incontinence, Urogenital Reconstruction, Urologic Oncology, Benign Prostate, Renal Transplant, and Other Urological Procedures). For each urological surgeon, three parameters were determined for each year: 1) Case-diversity (the number of distinct urological clinical domains in which they performed ≥2 procedures/year); 2) Subspecialty (the predominant clinical domain of cases that each surgeon performed); and 3) Subspecialty-focus (the proportion of a surgeon's total urological cases/year that belonged to their assigned clinical domain). We examined trends in these metrics over a five-year period, and compared results between urban and rural practice settings. RESULTS: We analyzed data for 2,237 individual surgeons performing 144,138 inpatient surgeries. Over time, urologist's practice patterns evolved toward lower case-diversity (p<0.001) and greater subspecialty-focus (p<0.001). These trends were more pronounced for surgeons practicing in urban versus rural practice settings (p-values <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: At a national level, urologists' inpatient surgical practice patterns are narrowing, with less case-diversity and higher subspecialty-focus. These trends are even more prominent among urologists in urban, compared with rural, practice settings.

Early impact of Medicare accountable care organizations on cancer surgery outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) were established to improve care and outcomes for beneficiaries requiring highly coordinated, complex care. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between hospital ACO participation and the outcomes of major surgical oncology procedures. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries older than 65 years who were undergoing a major surgical resection for colorectal, bladder, esophageal, kidney, liver, ovarian, pancreatic, lung, or prostate cancer from 2011 through 2013. A difference-in-differences analysis was implemented to compare the postimplementation period (January 2013 through December 2013) with the baseline period (January 2011 through December 2012) to assess the impact of hospital ACO participation on 30-day mortality, complications, readmissions, and length of stay (LOS). RESULTS: Among 384,519 patients undergoing major cancer surgery at 106 ACO hospitals and 2561 control hospitals, this study found a 30-day mortality rate of 3.4%, a readmission rate of 12.5%, a complication rate of 43.8%, and a prolonged LOS rate of 10.0% in control hospitals and similar rates in ACO hospitals. Secular trends were noted, with reductions in perioperative adverse events in control hospitals between the baseline and postimplementation periods: mortality (percentage-point reduction, 0.1%; P = .19), readmissions (percentage-point reduction, 0.4%; P = .001), complications (percentage-point reduction, 1.0%; P < .001), and prolonged LOS (percentage-point reduction, 1.1%; P < .001). After accounting for these secular trends, this study identified no significant effect of hospital participation in an ACO on the frequency of perioperative outcomes (difference-in-differences estimator P values, .24-.72). CONCLUSIONS: Early hospital participation in the Medicare Shared Savings Program ACO program was not associated with greater reductions in adverse perioperative outcomes for patients undergoing major cancer surgery in comparison with control hospitals. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2739-2746. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Understanding the Use of Prostate Biopsy Among Men with Limited Life Expectancy in a Statewide Quality Improvement Collaborative.

BACKGROUND: The potential harms of a prostate cancer (PCa) diagnosis may outweigh its benefits in elderly men. OBJECTIVE: To assess the use of prostate biopsy in men with limited life expectancy (LE) within the practices comprising the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC). DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: MUSIC is a consortium of 42 practices and nearly 85% of the urologists in Michigan. From July 2013 to October 2014, clinical data were collected prospectively for all men undergoing prostate biopsy. OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: We calculated comorbidity-adjusted LE in men aged ≥66 yr and identified men with <10 yr LE (limited LE) undergoing a first biopsy. Our LE calculator was not designed for men aged <66 yr; thus these men were excluded. Multivariable models estimated the proportion of all biopsies performed for men with limited LE in each MUSIC practice, adjusting for differences in patient characteristics. We also evaluated what treatments, if any, these patients received. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: Among 3035 men aged ≥66 yr undergoing initial prostate biopsy, 60% had none of the measured comorbidities. Overall, 547 men (18%) had limited LE. Compared with men with a longer LE, these men had significantly higher prostate-specific antigen levels and abnormal digital rectal examination findings. The adjusted proportion of biopsies performed for men with limited LE ranged from 3.8% to 39% across MUSIC practices (p < 0.001). PCa was diagnosed in 69% of men with limited LE; among this group, 74% received any active treatment. Of these men, 46% had high-grade cancer (Gleason score 8-10). CONCLUSIONS: Among a large and diverse group of urology practices, nearly 20% of prostate biopsies are performed in men with limited LE. These data provide useful context for quality improvement efforts aimed at optimizing patient selection for prostate biopsy. PATIENT SUMMARY: In this report, nearly 2 of every 10 men undergoing prostate biopsy had a life expectancy (LE) <10 yr. Implementing LE calculators in clinical practice may help refine patient selection for prostate biopsy.

Urologist Participation in Medicare Shared Savings Program Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs).

OBJECTIVE: To understand the current role of urologists in Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) and the organizational characteristics of ACOs with participating urologists. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using 2012-2013 Medicare data and the National Provider Identifier Database, we classified each urologist in the U.S. and Puerto Rico as either an MSSP ACO participant or nonparticipating provider. We then examined the distribution of ACO-participating urologists across the U.S. and among the first 220 MSSP ACOs. We also compared the characteristics of ACOs with and without participating urologists. RESULTS: Among 11,084 identified urologists, 1118 (10%) were MSSP ACO participants. ACO-participating urologists practiced more frequently in the Northeast and Midwest (P < .001), and were more commonly female (10% vs 8%, P = .003). At an organizational level, only 110 (50%) of the initial MSSP ACOs included at least one urologist; among this group, the number of participating urologists ranged from 1 to 55. ACOs with one or more participating urologist were larger organizations, with respect to both the number of assigned beneficiaries and the number of providers per 1000 beneficiaries (P < .001 for each comparison). The patient populations served by ACOs with and without urologists were similar (P > .05 for each comparison). CONCLUSION: A modest percentage of urologists participate in MSSP ACOs, although many of these organizations still lack any formal involvement by urological surgeons. Without such participation, improving the coordination, quality, and cost of urologic care for Medicare beneficiaries may be more challenging.

Understanding Inpatient Cost Variation in Kidney Transplantation: Implications for Payment Reforms.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the magnitude and sources of inpatient cost variation for kidney transplantation. METHODS: We used the 2005-2009 Nationwide Inpatient Sample to identify patients who underwent kidney transplantation. We first calculated the patient-level cost of each transplantation admission and then aggregated costs to the hospital level. We fit hierarchical linear regression models to identify sources of cost variation and to estimate how much unexplained variation remained after adjusting for case-mix variables commonly found in administrative datasets. RESULTS: We identified 8866 living donor (LDRT) and 5589 deceased donor (DDRT) renal transplantations. We found that higher costs were associated with the presence of complications (LDRT, 14%; P <.001; DDRT, 24%; P <.001), plasmapheresis (LDRT, 27%; P <.001; DDRT, 27%; P <.001), dialysis (LDRT, 4%; P <.001), and prolonged length of stay (LDRT, 84%; P <.001; DDRT, 82%; P <.001). Even after case-mix adjustment, a considerable amount of unexplained cost variation remained between transplant centers (DDRT, 52%; LDRT, 66%). CONCLUSION: Although significant inpatient cost variation is present across transplant centers, much of the cost variation for kidney transplantation is not explained by commonly used risk-adjustment variables in administrative datasets. These findings suggest that although there is an opportunity to achieve savings through payment reforms for kidney transplantation, policymakers should seek alternative sources of information (eg, clinical registry data) to delineate sources of warranted and unwarranted cost variation.

Understanding pre-enrollment surgical outcomes for hospitals participating in Medicare Accountable Care Organizations.

BACKGROUND: To anticipate the effects of accountable care organizations (ACOs) on surgical care, we examined pre-enrollment utilization, outcomes, and costs of inpatient surgery among hospitals currently enrolled in Medicare ACOs vs nonenrolling facilities. METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (2007 to 2011), we compared patient and hospital characteristics, distributions of surgical specialty care, and the most common inpatient surgeries performed between ACO-enrolling and nonenrolling hospitals before implementation of Medicare ACOs. We used multivariable regression to compare pre-enrollment inpatient mortality, length of stay (LOS), and costs. RESULTS: Hospitals now participating in Medicare ACO programs were more frequently nonprofit (P < .001) and teaching institutions (P = .01) that performed more specialty procedures (P < .001). We observed no clinically meaningful pre-enrollment differences for inpatient mortality, prolonged length of stay, or costs for procedures performed at ACO-enrolling vs nonenrolling hospitals. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare ACO hospitals had pre-enrollment outcomes that were similar to nonparticipating facilities. Future studies will determine whether ACO participation yields differential changes in surgical quality or costs.

Understanding the Performance of Active Surveillance Selection Criteria in Diverse Urology Practices.

PURPOSE: We used data from MUSIC (Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative) to evaluate the performance of published selection criteria for active surveillance in diverse urology practice settings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: For several active surveillance guidelines we calculated the proportion of men meeting each set of selection criteria who actually entered active surveillance, defined as the sensitivity of the guideline. After identifying the most sensitive guideline for the entire cohort we compared demographic and tumor characteristics between patients who met this guideline and entered active surveillance, and those who received initial definitive therapy. RESULTS: Of 4,882 men with newly diagnosed prostate cancer 18% underwent active surveillance. When applied to the entire cohort, the sensitivity of published guidelines ranged from 49% in Toronto to 62% at Johns Hopkins. At a practice level the sensitivity of Johns Hopkins criteria varied widely from 27% to 84% (p <0.001). Compared with men undergoing active surveillance, those meeting Johns Hopkins criteria who received definitive therapy were younger (p <0.001) and more likely to have a positive family history (p = 0.003), lower prostate specific antigen (p <0.001), a greater number of positive cores (2 vs 1) on biopsy (p <0.001) and a higher cancer volume in positive core(s) (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: The sensitivity of published active surveillance selection criteria varies widely across diverse urology practices. Among patients meeting the most stringent criteria those who received initial definitive therapy had characteristics suggesting greater cancer risk, underscoring the nuanced clinical factors that influence treatment decisions.

Utilization and Outcomes of Inpatient Urological Care at Safety Net Hospitals.

PURPOSE: Because proposed funding cuts in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act may impact care for urological patients at safety net hospitals, we examined the use, outcomes and costs of inpatient urological surgery at safety net vs nonsafety net facilities prior to health care reform. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the Nationwide Inpatient Sample we performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent inpatient urological surgeries from 2007 through 2011. We defined the safety net burden of each hospital based on the proportion of Medicaid and self-pay discharges. We examined the distribution of urological procedures performed and compared in-hospital mortality, prolonged length of stay and costs in the highest quartile of burden (safety net) vs the lowest quartile (nonsafety net). RESULTS: The distribution of urological procedures differed by safety net status with less benign prostate surgery (9.1% safety net vs 11.4% nonsafety net) and major cancer surgery (26.9% vs 34.3%), and more reconstructive surgery (8.1% vs 5.5%) at safety net facilities (p <0.001). Higher mortality at safety net hospitals was seen for nephrectomy (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.15-2.45) and transurethral resection of the prostate (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.22-3.87). Patients in safety net hospitals demonstrated greater prolonged length of stay after endoscopic stone surgery (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.01-1.41). Costs were similar across procedures except for radical prostatectomy and cystectomy. For these procedures the average admission was more expensive at nonsafety net facilities (prostatectomy $11,457 vs $9,610 and cystectomy $27,875 vs $24,048, each p <0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Reductions in funding to safety net hospitals with health care reform could adversely impact access to care for patients with a broad range of urological conditions, potentially exacerbating existing disparities for vulnerable populations served by these facilities.

A Statewide Intervention to Reduce Hospitalizations after Prostate Biopsy.

PURPOSE: Recent data suggest that increasing rates of hospitalization after prostate biopsy are mainly due to infections from fluoroquinolone-resistant bacteria. We report the initial results of a statewide quality improvement intervention aimed at reducing infection related hospitalizations after transrectal prostate biopsy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From March 2012 through May 2014 data on patient demographics, comorbidities, prophylactic antibiotics and post-biopsy complications were prospectively entered into an electronic registry by trained abstractors in 30 practices participating in the MUSIC. During this period each practice implemented one or both of the interventions aimed at addressing fluoroquinolone resistance, namely 1) use of rectal swab culture directed antibiotics or 2) augmented antibiotic prophylaxis with a second agent in addition to standard fluoroquinolone therapy. We identified all patients with an infection related hospitalization within 30 days after biopsy and validated these events with claims data for a subset of patients. We then compared the frequency of infection related hospitalizations before (5,028 biopsies) and after (4,087 biopsies) implementation of the quality improvement intervention. RESULTS: Overall the proportion of patients with infection related hospitalizations after prostate biopsy decreased by 53% from before to after implementation of the quality improvement intervention (1.19% before vs 0.56% after, p=0.002). Among post-implementation biopsies the rates of hospitalization were similar for patients receiving culture directed (0.47%) vs augmented (0.57%) prophylaxis. At a practice level the relative change in hospitalization rates varied from a 7.4% decrease to a 3.0% increase. Fourteen practices had no post-implementation hospitalizations. CONCLUSIONS: A statewide intervention aimed at addressing fluoroquinolone resistance reduced post-prostate biopsy infection related hospitalizations in Michigan by 53%.

Contemporary use of initial active surveillance among men in Michigan with low-risk prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Active surveillance (AS) has been proposed as an effective strategy to reduce overtreatment among men with lower risk prostate cancers. However, historical rates of initial surveillance are low (4-20%), and little is known about its application among community-based urology practices. OBJECTIVE: To describe contemporary utilization of AS among a population-based sample of men with low-risk prostate cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: We performed a prospective cohort study of men with low-risk prostate cancer managed by urologists participating in the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC). OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The principal outcome was receipt of AS as initial management for low-risk prostate cancer including the frequency of follow-up prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing, prostate biopsy, and local therapy. We examined variation in the use of surveillance according to patient characteristics and across MUSIC practices. Finally, we used claims data to validate treatment classification in the MUSIC registry. RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS: We identified 682 low-risk patients from 17 MUSIC practices. Overall, 49% of men underwent initial AS. Use of initial surveillance varied widely across practices (27-80%; p=0.005), even after accounting for differences in patient characteristics. Among men undergoing initial surveillance with at least 12 mo of follow-up, PSA testing was common (85%), whereas repeat biopsy was performed in only one-third of patients. There was excellent agreement between treatment assignments in the MUSIC registry and claims data (κ=0.93). Limitations include unknown treatment for 8% of men with low-risk cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Half of men in Michigan with low-risk prostate cancer receive initial AS. Because this proportion is much higher than reported previously, our findings suggest growing acceptance of this strategy for reducing overtreatment. PATIENT SUMMARY: We examined the use of initial active surveillance for the management of men with low-risk prostate cancer across the state of Michigan. We found that initial surveillance is used much more commonly than previously reported, but the likelihood of a patient being placed on surveillance depends strongly on where he is treated.