{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020119225037257823, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.715, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Larger Centers Produce Better Outcomes in Pediatric Cardiac Surgery: Regionalization is a Superior Model - The Con Prospective.

Regionalization, in the context of congenital heart surgery, describes a process where smaller units close and patients are redistributed to larger centers. Proponents argue this will produce superior patient outcome based primarily on a volume-outcome effect. The potential disadvantage is that, as distance to center increases, access to service is compromised. In this article the volume-outcome effect is appraised and the effect of risk-stratification and threshold volumes explored. Access to service, and how certain congenital lesions and demographics might be disadvantaged, is reviewed. Alternative models are considered including collaborative programing and a standardizing approach of agreed parameters in personnel and infrastructure. Finally the influence of newer developments and quality metrics, including outcome databases, digital technologies and team-cognitive performance, needs to be factored in as the future unfolds. Ultimately, the design of a national congenital cardiac program should aspire to deliver care that is optimal, equitable and economic for the whole population. The solution lies in the distillation of competing variables cognizant of regional demographics and geography.