Comparing colon cancer outcomes: The impact of low hospital case volume and case-mix adjustment
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 10, 2026

Competing-Risk Nomogram for Predicting Cancer-Specific Survival in Multiple Primary Colorectal Cancer Patients after Surgery
Published on: September 27, 2024
C Fischer1, H F Lingsma1, N van Leersum2
1Department of Public Health, Centre for Medical Decision Making, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Objective:
When comparing performance across hospitals it is essential to consider the noise caused by low hospital case volume and to perform adequate case-mix adjustment. We aimed to quantify the role of noise and case-mix adjustment on standardized postoperative mortality and anastomotic leakage (AL) rates.
Methods:
We studied 13,120 patients who underwent colon cancer resection in 85 Dutch hospitals. We addressed differences between hospitals in postoperative mortality and AL, using fixed (ignoring noise) and random effects (incorporating noise) logistic regression models with general and additional, disease specific, case-mix adjustment.
Results:
Adding disease specific variables improved the performance of the case-mix adjustment models for postoperative mortality (c-statistic increased from 0.77 to 0.81). The overall variation in standardized mortality ratios was similar, but some individual hospitals changed considerably. For the standardized AL rates the performance of the adjustment models was poor (c-statistic 0.59 and 0.60) and overall variation was small. Most of the observed variation between hospitals was actually noise.
Conclusion:
Noise had a larger effect on hospital performance than extended case-mix adjustment, although some individual hospital outcome rates were affected by more detailed case-mix adjustment. To compare outcomes between hospitals it is crucial to consider noise due to low hospital case volume with a random effects model.
Related Concept Videos
Methods of Documentation VI: Case Management Model
For example, a patient with a chronic...
Cancer Survival Analysis