Recent trends in the use of radical prostatectomy in England: the epidemiology of diffusion

被引:38
作者
Oliver, SE
Donovan, JL
Peters, TJ
Frankel, S
Hamdy, FC
Neal, DE
机构
[1] Univ York, Dept Hlth Sci, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
[2] Univ Bristol, Div Primary Hlth Care, Bristol, Avon, England
[3] Univ Bristol, Dept Social Med, Bristol, Avon, England
[4] Univ Sheffield, Div Clin Sci, Acad Urol Unit, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[5] Addenbrookes Hosp, Ctr Oncol, Cambridge, England
关键词
prostate cancer; radical prostatectomy; demography; frequency; screening;
D O I
10.1046/j.1464-410X.2003.04083.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
OBJECTIVE To describe recent trends in the use of radical prostatectomy (RP) in England, as there is currently no consensus on the most effective treatment for localized prostate cancer, although RP is the treatment of choice among urological surgeons for men aged < 70 years. METHODS Routine data were assessed to establish the number of RPs performed in England in 1991-99. Age-standardized operation rates were compared by region and socio-economic group, and the geographical spread of use mapped. RESULTS The number of RPs performed annually increased nearly 20-fold between 1991 and 1999. Rates of surgery were greatest in the London National Health Service (NHS) regions and lowest in the Trent region. Outside London, the risk of surgery in a NHS hospital was significantly greater for men living in the least deprived areas; in London this trend was reversed. CONCLUSION Rapid increases in the use of RP showed marked regional variations, most likely related to access to prostate-specific antigen testing and the location of surgeons able to carry out radical surgery. By 1999, a third of procedures were still being undertaken in 'low-volume' hospitals, with implications for the quality of care and outcomes. Crucially, these developments occurred in the absence of robust information about the effectiveness of RP. Recent funding of a randomized trial of treatment options in this area is welcome, but wider questions remain about the timing of the evaluation of surgical technologies.
引用
收藏
页码:331 / 336
页数:6
相关论文
共 26 条
[1]   Do we do what they say we do? Coding errors in urology [J].
Ballaro, A ;
Oliver, S ;
Emberton, M .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2000, 85 (04) :389-391
[2]  
*BAUS, 2002, MIN DAT NEWL PRES UR
[3]   Rising incidence of prostate cancer in Scotland: increased risk or increased detection? [J].
Brewster, DH ;
Fraser, LA ;
Harris, V ;
Black, RJ .
BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2000, 85 (04) :463-472
[4]   RANDOMIZATION OF 1ST PATIENT [J].
CHALMERS, TC .
MEDICAL CLINICS OF NORTH AMERICA, 1975, 59 (04) :1035-1038
[5]  
Chamberlain J, 1997, BRIT J UROL, V79, P1
[6]  
Collins MM, 2000, J FAM PRACTICE, V49, P169
[7]   Quality improvement report - Improving design and conduct of randomised trials by embedding them in qualitative research: ProtecT (prostate testing for cancer and treatment) study [J].
Donovan, J ;
Mills, N ;
Smith, M ;
Brindle, L ;
Jacoby, A ;
Peters, T ;
Frankel, S ;
Neal, D ;
Hamdy, F .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2002, 325 (7367) :766-769
[8]  
Donovan Jenny L., 1999, BMJ, V318, P299
[9]   The effect of hospital volume on mortality and resource use after radical prostatectomy [J].
Ellison, LM ;
Heaney, JA ;
Birkmeyer, JD .
JOURNAL OF UROLOGY, 2000, 163 (03) :867-869
[10]   Comparison of recommendations by urologists and radiation oncologists for treatment of clinically localized prostate cancer [J].
Fowler, FJ ;
Collins, MM ;
Albertsen, PC ;
Zietman, A ;
Elliott, DB ;
Barry, MJ .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 283 (24) :3217-3222