Back to Search
Start Over
The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Inpatient Quality Indicator #11 overall mortality rate does not accurately assess mortality risk after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair
- Source :
- Journal of Vascular Surgery. 61(1):44-49
- Publication Year :
- 2015
- Publisher :
- Elsevier BV, 2015.
-
Abstract
- Objective The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Inpatient Quality Indicator (IQI) #11, abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair mortality rate, is a measure of hospital quality that is publically reported but has not been externally validated. Because the IQI #11 overall mortality rate includes both intact and ruptured aneurysms and open and endovascular repair, we hypothesized that IQI #11 overall mortality rate does not provide accurate assessment of mortality risk after AAA repair and that AAA mortality cannot be accurately assessed by a single quality measure. Methods Using AHRQ IQI software version 4.2, we calculated observed (O) and expected (E) mortality rates for IQI #11 for all hospitals performing more than 10 AAA repairs per year in the Nationwide Inpatient Sample for the years 2007 to 2011. We used Spearman correlation coefficient to compare expected rates as determined by IQI #11 overall mortality rate risk adjustment methodology and observed rates for all AAA repairs in four cohorts stratified by aneurysm stability (ruptured vs intact) and method of repair (open vs endovascular). Results Among 187,773 AAA repairs performed at 1268 U.S. hospitals, hospitals' IQI #11 overall expected rates correlated poorly with their observed rates (E: 5.0% ± 4.4% vs O: 6.0% ± 9.8%; r = .49). For ruptured AAAs, IQI #11 overall mortality rate methodology underestimated the mortality risk of open repair (E: 34% ± 7.2% vs O: 40.1% ± 38.2%; r = 0.20) and endovascular repair (E: 24.8% ± 9% vs O: 27.3% ± 37.9%; r = 0.08). For intact AAA repair, IQI #11 overall mortality rate methodology underestimated the mortality risk of open repair (E: 4.3% ± 2.4% vs O: 6.3% ± 16.1%; r = .24) but overestimated the mortality risk of endovascular repair (E: 1.3% ± 0.8% vs O: 1.1% ± 3.7%; r = 0.25). Hospitals' observed mortality rates after intact AAA repair were not correlated with their mortality rates after ruptured AAA repair ( r = 0.03). Conclusions IQI #11 overall mortality rate fails to provide accurate assessment of inpatient mortality risk after AAA repair. Thus, it is inappropriate to use IQI #11 overall mortality rate for quality reporting. The accuracy of separate quality measures that assess mortality risk after repair of ruptured and intact AAAs, stratified by the use of open or endovascular repair, should be examined.
- Subjects :
- medicine.medical_specialty
Time Factors
Databases, Factual
Ruptured aneurysms
Aortic Rupture
Hospital quality
Risk Assessment
Decision Support Techniques
Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation
Aneurysm
Predictive Value of Tests
Risk Factors
Internal medicine
medicine
Humans
Hospital Mortality
cardiovascular diseases
Quality Indicators, Health Care
Inpatients
Inpatient mortality
business.industry
Mortality rate
Endovascular Procedures
Reproducibility of Results
Risk adjustment
medicine.disease
Abdominal aortic aneurysm
Hospitals
United States
Surgery
Treatment Outcome
cardiovascular system
Open repair
Health Services Research
business
Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal
Subjects
Details
- ISSN :
- 07415214
- Volume :
- 61
- Issue :
- 1
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Journal of Vascular Surgery
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....8972aa60a9d5804ed6701295bb148458
- Full Text :
- https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2014.06.106