Search

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Variation in outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) may reflect differences in quality of care. To date, however, we lack a methodology to monitor and improve national hospital 30-day mortality rates among patients undergoing PCI.

Risk-standardized measures of hospital outcomes reported by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services include Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) patients and exclude Medicare Advantage (MA) patients due to data availability. MA penetration varies greatly nationwide and seems to be associated with increased FFS population risk. Whether variation in MA penetration affects the performance on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Service measures is unknown.

National attention has increasingly focused on readmission as a target for quality improvement. We present the development and validation of a model approved by the National Quality Forum and used by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services for hospital-level public reporting of risk-standardized readmission rates for patients discharged from the hospital after an acute myocardial infarction.

Patient outcomes provide a critical perspective on quality of care. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is publicly reporting hospital 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates (RSMRs) and risk-standardized readmission rates (RSRRs) for patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) and heart failure (HF). We provide a national perspective on hospital performance for the 2010 release of these measures.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) readmission measure is based on all-cause readmissions to any hospital within 30 days of discharge. Whether a measure based on same-hospital readmission, an outcome that is easier for hospitals and some systems to track, could serve as a proxy for the all-hospital measure is not known.

The rankings of “America’s Best Hospitals” by U.S.News & World Reportare influential, but the performance of ranked hospitals in caring for patients with routine cardiac conditions such as heart failure is not known.

ObjectiveTo examine the association of hospital volume (a marker of quality of care) with hospital readmission rates.DesignRetrospective cross-sectional study.Setting4651US acute care hospitals.Study data6 916 644 adult discharges, excluding patients receiving psychiatric or medical cancer treatment.Main outcome measuresWe used Medicare fee-for-service data from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2012 to calculate observed-to-expected, unplanned, 30 day, standardized readmission rates for hospitals and for specialty cohorts medicine, surgery/gynecology, cardiorespiratory, cardiovascular, and neurology. We assessed the association of hospital volume by quintiles with 30 day, standardized readmission rates, with and without adjustment for hospital characteristics (safety net status, teaching status, geographic region, urban/rural status, nurse to bed ratio, ownership, and cardiac procedure capability. We also examined associations with the composite outcome of 30 day, standardized readmission or mortality rates.ResultsMean 30 day, standardized readmission rate among the fifth of hospitals with the lowest volume was 14.7 (standard deviation 5.3) compared with 15.9 (1.7) among the fifth of hospitals with the highest volume (P<0.001). We observed the same pattern of lower readmission rates in the lowest versus highest volume hospitals in the specialty cohorts for medicine (16.6 v17.4, P<0.001), cardiorespiratory (18.5 v20.5, P<0.001), and neurology (13.2 v14.0, p=0.01) cohorts; the cardiovascular cohort, however, had an inverse association (14.6 v13.7, P<0.001). These associations remained after adjustment for hospital characteristics except in the cardiovascular cohort, which became non-significant, and the surgery/gynecology cohort, in which the lowest volume fifth of hospitals had significantly higher standardized readmission rates than the highest volume fifth (difference 0.63 percentage points (95% confidence interval 0.10 to 1.17), P=0.02). Mean 30 day, standardized mortality or readmission rate was not significantly different between highest and lowest volume fifths (20.4 v20.2, P=0.19) and was highest in the middle fifth of hospitals (range 20.6–20.8).ConclusionsStandardized readmission rates are lowest in the lowest volume hospitals—opposite from the typical association of greater hospital volume with better outcomes. This association was independent of hospital characteristics and was only partially attenuated by examining mortality and readmission together. Our findings suggest that readmissions are associated with different aspects of care than mortality or complications.

ObjectivesTo determine whether high performing hospitals with low 30 day risk standardized readmission rates have a lower proportion of readmissions from specific diagnoses and time periods after admission or instead have a similar distribution of readmission diagnoses and timing to lower performing institutions.Design Retrospective cohort study.SettingMedicare beneficiaries in the United States.ParticipantsPatients aged 65 and older who were readmitted within 30 days after hospital admission for heart failure, acute myocardial infarction, or pneumonia in 2007-09. Main outcome measuresReadmission diagnoses were classified with a modified version of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’ condition categories, and readmission timing was classified by day (0-30) after hospital discharge. Hospital 30 day risk standardized readmission rates over the three years of study were calculated with public reporting methods of the US federal government, and hospitals were categorized with bootstrap analysis as having high, average, or low readmission performance for each index condition. High and low performing hospitals had ≥95% probability of having an interval estimate respectively less than or greater than the national 30 day readmission rate over the three year period of study. All remaining hospitals were considered average performers.ResultsFor readmissions in the 30 days after the index admission, there were 320 003 after 1 291 211 admissions for heart failure (4041 hospitals), 102 536 after 517 827 admissions for acute myocardial infarction (2378 hospitals), and 208 438 after 1 135 932 admissions for pneumonia (4283 hospitals). The distribution of readmissions by diagnosis was similar across categories of hospital performance for all three conditions. High performing hospitals had fewer readmissions for all common diagnoses. Median time to readmission was similar by hospital performance for heart failure and acute myocardial infarction, though was 1.4 days longer among high versus low performing hospitals for pneumonia (P<0.001). Findings were unchanged after adjustment for other hospital characteristics potentially associated with readmission patterns.ConclusionsHigh performing hospitals have proportionately fewer 30 day readmissions without differences in readmission diagnoses and timing, suggesting the possible benefit of strategies that lower risk of readmission globally rather than for specific diagnoses or time periods after hospital stay.

Background:After hospitalization for heart failure (HF) and acute myocardial infarction (AMI), patients experience increased risk of death and hospital readmission. Defining the trajectory and timing of this period of risk may help guide interventions to improve post-discharge outcomes.