Conventional models overestimate the statistical significance of volume-outcome associations, compared with multilevel models

J Clin Epidemiol. 2005 Apr;58(4):391-400. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.12.001.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the use of conventional statistical models with multilevel regression models in volume-outcome analyses of surgical procedures in an empirical case study.

Study design and setting: Using conventional regression models and multilevel regression models, we estimated the effect of hospital volume and surgeon volume on 30-day mortality and length of postoperative hospital stay in persons who had an esophagectomy, pancreaticoduodenectomy, or major lung resection for cancer in Ontario, Canada, from 1994 to 1999.

Results: The point estimates of volume-outcome associations were similar using either method; however, the 95% confidence intervals estimated by multilevel models were wider than those estimated by conventional models. A significant association between volume and mortality was identified in 2 of 18 (11%) comparisons using conventional analysis but in none of the 18 (0%) comparisons using multilevel analysis, and between volume and length of stay in 15 of 18 (83%) comparisons using conventional analysis and in 1 of 18 (6%) comparisons using multilevel analysis.

Conclusion: Conventional and multilevel statistical models can yield substantially different results in the analysis of volume-outcome associations for surgical procedures.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Evaluation Study
  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Age Factors
  • Esophagectomy / mortality*
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Length of Stay
  • Lung Neoplasms / mortality
  • Lung Neoplasms / surgery
  • Male
  • Models, Statistical*
  • Pancreaticoduodenectomy / mortality*
  • Pneumonectomy / mortality*
  • Regression Analysis
  • Sex Factors
  • Treatment Outcome
  • Workload