Abstract
BackgroundHospital consolidation into health systems has mixed effects on surgical quality, potentially related to degree of surgical centralization at high-volume (hub) sites. We developed a novel measure of centralization and evaluated a hub and spoke framework. MethodsSurgical centralization within health systems was measured using hospital surgical volumes (American Hospital Association) and health system data (Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality). Hub and spoke hospitals were compared using mixed effects logistic regression and system characteristics associated with surgical centralization were identified using a linear model. ResultsWithin 382 health systems containing 3022 hospitals, system hubs perform 63% of cases (IQR 40–84%). Hubs are larger, in metropolitan and urban areas, and more often academically affiliated. Degree of surgical centralization varies ten-fold. Larger, multistate, and investor-owned systems are less centralized. Adjusting for these factors, there is less centralization among teaching systems (p < 0.001). ConclusionsA hub-spoke framework applies to most health systems but centralization varies significantly. Future studies of health system surgical care should assess the contributions of surgical centralization and teaching status on differential quality.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
