Advanced

AJNR - American Journal of Neuroradiology

This Article Abstract Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hoh, B. L. Articles by Barker, F. G. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Hoh, B. L. Articles by Barker, F. G., II

In-Hospital Morbidity and Mortality after Endovascular Treatment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms in the United States, 1996–2000: Effect of Hospital and Physician Volume

Brian L. Hoh^a,c, James D. Rabinov^b,d, Johnny C. Pryor^a,b,c, Bob S. Carter^a,c and Fred G. Barker, II^a,c

^a Neurosurgical Service, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
^b Department of Radiology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA
^c Department of Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
^d Department of Radiology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA

View larger version (17K): [in a new window]   FIG 1. Bar graphs show probability of in-hospital mortality (A) and discharge other than to home (B) in relation to hospital volume of endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms, by quartile. Error bars, 95% confidence intervals.

View larger version (15K): [in a new window]   FIG 2. Bar graphs show probability of in-hospital mortality (A) and discharge other than to home (B) in relation to treating physician volume of endovascular treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms, by quartile. Error bars, 95% confidence intervals.

View larger version (10K): [in a new window]   FIG 3. c statistic (a generalization of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for ordinal models) plotted against cutoff points to divide high volume providers from low volume providers. The c statistic for all possible cutoff points is within the 95% confidence interval for the best cutoff point, indicating that the data fail to support a unique caseload value under which patient outcomes are evidently inferior.