Search

Objectives The extent to which care quality influenced outcomes for patients hospitalised with COVID-19 is unknown. Our objective was to determine if prepandemic hospital quality is associated with mortality among Medicare patients hospitalised with COVID-19.Design This is a retrospective observational study. We calculated hospital-level risk-standardised in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates (risk-standardised mortality rates, RSMRs) for patients hospitalised with COVID-19, and correlation coefficients between RSMRs and pre-COVID-19 hospital quality, overall and stratified by hospital characteristics.Setting Short-term acute care hospitals and critical access hospitals in the USA.Participants Hospitalised Medicare beneficiaries (Fee-For-Service and Medicare Advantage) age 65 and older hospitalised with COVID-19, discharged between 1 April 2020 and 30 September 2021.Intervention/exposure Pre-COVID-19 hospital quality.Outcomes Risk-standardised COVID-19 in-hospital and 30-day mortality rates (RSMRs).Results In-hospital (n=4256) RSMRs for Medicare patients hospitalised with COVID-19 (April 2020–September 2021) ranged from 4.5% to 59.9% (median 18.2%; IQR 14.7%–23.7%); 30-day RSMRs ranged from 12.9% to 56.2% (IQR 24.6%–30.6%). COVID-19 RSMRs were negatively correlated with star rating summary scores (in-hospital correlation coefficient −0.41, p

Objectives High-value care is providing high quality care at low cost; we sought to define hospital value and identify the characteristics of hospitals which provide high-value care.Design Retrospective observational study.Setting Acute care hospitals in the USA.Participants All Medicare beneficiaries with claims included in Center for Medicare & Medicaid Services Overall Star Ratings or in publicly available Medicare spending per beneficiary data.Primary and secondary outcome measures Our primary outcome was value defined as the difference between Star Ratings quality score and Medicare spending; the secondary outcome was classification as a 4 or 5 star hospital with lowest quintile Medicare spending (‘high value’) or 1 or 2 star hospital with highest quintile spending (‘low value’).Results Two thousand nine hundred and fourteen hospitals had both quality and spending data, and were included. The value score had a mean (SD) of 0.58 (1.79). A total of 286 hospitals were classified as high value; these represented 28.6% of 999 4 and 5 star hospitals and 46.8% of 611 low cost hospitals. A total of 258 hospitals were classified as low value; these represented 26.6% of 970 1 and 2 star hospitals and 49.3% of 523 high cost hospitals. In regression models ownership, non-teaching status, beds, urbanity, nurse to bed ratio, percentage of dual eligible Medicare patients and percentage of disproportionate share hospital payments were associated with the primary value score.Conclusions There are high quality hospitals that are not high value, and a number of factors are strongly associated with being low or high value. These findings can inform efforts of policymakers and hospitals to increase the value of care.

Objectives To develop a model of in-hospital mortality using medical record front page (MRFP) data and assess its validity in case-mix standardisation by comparison with a model developed using the complete medical record data.Design A nationally representative retrospective study.Setting Representative hospitals in China, covering 161 hospitals in modelling cohort and 156 hospitals in validation cohort.Participants Representative patients admitted for acute myocardial infarction. 8370 patients in modelling cohort and 9704 patients in validation cohort.Primary outcome measures In-hospital mortality, which was defined explicitly as death that occurred during hospitalisation, and the hospital-level risk standardised mortality rate (RSMR).Results A total of 14 variables were included in the model predicting in-hospital mortality based on MRFP data, with the area under receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.78 among modelling cohort and 0.79 among validation cohort. The median of absolute difference between the hospital RSMR predicted by hierarchical generalised linear models established based on MRFP data and complete medical record data, which was built as ‘reference model’, was 0.08% (10th and 90th percentiles: −1.8% and 1.6%). In the regression model comparing the RSMR between two models, the slope and intercept of the regression equation is 0.90 and 0.007 in modelling cohort, while 0.85 and 0.010 in validation cohort, which indicated that the evaluation capability from two models were very similar.Conclusions The models based on MRFP data showed good discrimination and calibration capability, as well as similar risk prediction effect in comparison with the model based on complete medical record data, which proved that MRFP data could be suitable for risk adjustment in hospital performance measurement.

Objective To determine whether informed consent for surgical procedures performed in US hospitals meet a minimum standard of quality, we developed and tested a quality measure of informed consent documents. Design Retrospective observational study of informed consent documents. Setting 25 US hospitals, diverse in size and geographical region. Cohort Among Medicare fee-for- service patients undergoing elective procedures in participating hospitals, we assessed the informed consent documents associated with these procedures. We aimed to review 100 qualifying procedures per hospital; the selected sample was representative of the procedure types performed at each hospital. Primary outcome The outcome was hospital quality of informed consent documents, assessed by two independent raters using an eight-item instrument previously developed for this measure and scored on a scale of 0–20, with 20 representing the highest quality. The outcome was reported as the mean hospital document score and the proportion of documents meeting a quality threshold of 10. Reliability of the hospital score was determined based on subsets of randomly selected documents; face validity was assessed using stakeholder feedback. Results Among 2480 informed consent documents from 25 hospitals, mean hospital scores ranged from 0.6 (95% CI 0.3 to 0.9) to 10.8 (95% CI 10.0 to 11.6). Most hospitals had at least one document score at least 10 out of 20 points, but only two hospitals had >50% of their documents score above a 10-point threshold. The Spearman correlation of the measures score was 0.92. Stakeholders reported that the measure was important, though some felt it did not go far enough to assess informed consent quality. Conclusion All hospitals performed poorly on a measure of informed consent document quality, though there was some variation across hospitals. Measuring the quality of hospital’s informed consent documents can serve as a first step in driving attention to gaps in quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To develop a nationally applicable tool for assessing the quality of informed consent documents for elective procedures. Design Mixed qualitative-quantitative approach. Setting Convened seven meetings with stakeholders to obtain input and feedback on the tool. Participants Team of physician investigators, measure development experts, and a working group of nine patients and patient advocates (caregivers, advocates for vulnerable populations and patient safety experts) from different regions of the country. Interventions With stakeholder input, we identified elements of high-quality informed consent documents, aggregated into three domains: content, presentation and timing. Based on this comprehensive taxonomy of key elements, we convened the working group to offer input on the development of an abstraction tool to assess the quality of informed consent documents in three phases: (1) selecting the highest-priority elements to be operationalised as items in the tool; (2) iteratively refining and testing the tool using a sample of qualifying informed consent documents from eight hospitals; and (3) developing a scoring approach for the tool. Finally, we tested the reliability of the tool in a subsample of 250 informed consent documents from 25 additional hospitals. Outcomes Abstraction tool to evaluate the quality of informed consent documents. Results We identified 53 elements of informed consent quality; of these, 15 were selected as highest priority for inclusion in the abstraction tool and 8 were feasible to measure. After seven cycles of iterative development and testing of survey items, and development and refinement of a training manual, two trained raters achieved high item-level agreement, ranging from 92% to 100%. Conclusions We identified key quality elements of an informed consent document and operationalised the highest-priority elements to define a minimum standard for informed consent documents. This tool is a starting point that can enable hospitals and other providers to evaluate and improve the quality of informed consent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective To compare trends in readmission rates among safety net and non-safety net hospitals under the US Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP). Design A retrospective time series analysis using Medicare administrative claims data from January 2008 to June 2015. Setting We examined 3254 US hospitals eligible for penalties under the HRRP, categorised as safety net or non-safety net hospitals based on the hospital's proportion of patients with low socioeconomic status. Participants Admissions for Medicare fee-for-service patients, age ≥65 years, discharged alive, who had a valid five-digit zip code and did not have a principal discharge diagnosis of cancer or psychiatric illness were included, for a total of 52 516 213 index admissions. Primary and secondary outcome measures Mean hospital-level, all-condition, 30-day risk-adjusted standardised unplanned readmission rate, measured quarterly, along with quarterly rate of change, and an interrupted time series examining: April-June 2010, after HRRP was passed, and October-December 2012, after HRRP penalties were implemented. Results 58.0% (SD 15.3) of safety net hospitals and 17.1% (SD 10.4) of non-safety net hospitals' patients were in the lowest quartile of socioeconomic status. The mean safety net hospital standardised readmission rate declined from 17.0% (SD 3.7) to 13.6% (SD 3.6), whereas the mean non-safety net hospital declined from 15.4% (SD 3.0) to 12.7% (SD 2.5). The absolute difference in rates between safety net and non-safety net hospitals declined from 1.6% (95% CI 1.3 to 1.9) to 0.9% (0.7 to 1.2). The quarterly decline in standardised readmission rates was 0.03 percentage points (95% CI 0.03 to 0.02, p<0.001) greater among safety net hospitals over the entire study period, and no differential change among safety net and non-safety net hospitals was found after either HRRP was passed or penalties enacted. Conclusions Since HRRP was passed and penalties implemented, readmission rates for safety net hospitals have decreased more rapidly than those for non-safety net hospitals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: As the predominant approach to acute reperfusion for ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in many countries, fibrinolytic therapy provides a relative risk reduction for death of ~16% across the range of baseline risk. For patients with low baseline mortality risk, fibrinolytic therapy may therefore provide little benefit, which may be offset by the risk of major bleeding. We aimed to construct a tool to determine if it is possible to identify a low-risk group among fibrinolytic therapyeligible patients. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: The China Patient-centered Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events (PEACE) study includes a nationally representative retrospective sample of patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in 162 hospitals. Participants: 3741 patients with STEMI who were fibrinolytic-eligible but did not receive reperfusion therapy Main outcome measures: In-hospital mortality, which was defined as a composite of death occurring within hospitalisation or withdrawal from treatment due to a terminal status at discharge. Results: In the study cohort, the in-hospital mortality was 14.7%. In the derivation cohort and the validation cohort, the combination of systolic blood pressure (=100 mm Hg), age (<60 years old) and gender (male) identified one-fifth of the cohort with an average mortality rate of <3.0%. Half of this low risk group--those with non-anterior AMI--had an average in-hospital death risk of 1.5%. Conclusions: Nearly, one in five patients with STEMI who are eligible for fibrinolytic therapy are at a low risk for in-hospital death. Three simple factors available at the time of presentation can identify these individuals and support decision-making about the use of fibrinolytic therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: During the past decade, the volume of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in China has risen by more than 20-fold. Yet little is known about patterns of care and outcomes across hospitals, regions and time during this period of rising cardiovascular disease and dynamic change in the Chinese healthcare system. Methods and analysis: Using the China PEACE (Patient-centered Evaluative Assessment of Cardiac Events) research network, the Retrospective Study of Coronary Catheterisation and Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (China PEACE-Retrospective CathPCI Study) will examine a nationally representative sample of 11 900 patients who underwent coronary catheterisation or PCI at 55 Chinese hospitals during 2001, 2006 and 2011. We selected patients and study sites using a two-stage cluster sampling design with simple random sampling stratified within economical-geographical strata. A central coordinating centre will monitor data quality at the stages of case ascertainment, medical record abstraction and data management. We will examine patient characteristics, diagnostic testing patterns, procedural treatments and in-hospital outcomes, including death, complications of treatment and costs of hospitalisation. We will additionally characterise variation in treatments and outcomes by patient characteristics, hospital, region and study year. Ethics and dissemination: The China PEACE collaboration is designed to translate research into improved care for patients. The study protocol was approved by the central ethics committee at the China National Center for Cardiovascular Diseases (NCCD) and collaborating hospitals. Findings will be shared with participating hospitals, policymakers and the academic community to promote quality monitoring, quality improvement and the efficient allocation and use of coronary catheterisation and PCI in China. Registration details: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01624896). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives To 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. Setting Medicare beneficiaries in the United States. Participants Patients 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 measures Readmission 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. Results For 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. Conclusions High 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author discusses the accuracy and reliability of clinical outcomes in order to measure the performance of the health care organizations in the U.S. He states that the validity of the outcome measures captures the end result of a healthcare, which also has financial consequences. He further highlights that the measures are need to be credible, meaningful, and trustworthy in order to elevate practice and instill pubic confidence.