Peterson Eric D, Roe Matthew T, Mulgund Jyotsna, DeLong Elizabeth R, Lytle Barbara L, Brindis Ralph G, Smith Sidney C, Pollack Charles V, Newby L Kristin, Harrington Robert A, Gibler W Brian, Ohman E Magnus
Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27705, USA.
JAMA. 2006 Apr 26;295(16):1912-20. doi: 10.1001/jama.295.16.1912.
Selected care processes are increasingly being used to measure hospital quality; however, data regarding the association between hospital process performance and outcomes are limited.
To evaluate contemporary care practices consistent with the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guideline recommendations, to examine how hospital performance varied among centers, to identify characteristics predictive of higher guideline adherence, and to assess whether hospitals' overall composite guideline adherence was associated with observed and risk-adjusted in-hospital mortality rates.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: An observational analysis of hospital care in 350 academic and nonacademic US centers of 64,775 patients enrolled in the CRUSADE (Can Rapid Risk Stratification of Unstable Angina Patients Suppress Adverse Outcomes With Early Implementation of the ACC/AHA Guidelines) National Quality Improvement Initiative between January 1, 2001, and September 30, 2003, presenting with chest pain and positive electrocardiographic changes or cardiac biomarkers consistent with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndrome (ACS).
Use of 9 ACC/AHA class I guideline-recommended treatments and the correlation among hospitals' use of individual care processes as well as overall composite adherence rates.
Overall, the 9 ACC/AHA guideline-recommended treatments were adhered to in 74% of eligible instances. There was modest correlation in hospital performance among the individual ACS process metrics. However, composite adherence performance varied widely (median [interquartile range] composite adherence scores from lowest to highest hospital quartiles, 63% [59%-66%] vs 82% [80%-84%]). Composite guideline adherence rate was significantly associated with in-hospital mortality, with observed mortality rates decreasing from 6.31% for the lowest adherence quartile to 4.15% for the highest adherence quartile (P<.001). After risk adjustment, every 10% increase in composite adherence at a hospital was associated with an analogous 10% decrease in its patients' likelihood of in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval, 0.84-0.97; P<.001).
A significant association between care process and outcomes was found, supporting the use of broad, guideline-based performance metrics as a means of assessing and helping improve hospital quality.
越来越多地使用特定护理流程来衡量医院质量;然而,关于医院流程绩效与结果之间关联的数据有限。
评估符合美国心脏病学会/美国心脏协会(ACC/AHA)指南建议的当代护理实践,研究各中心医院绩效的差异,确定预测更高指南依从性的特征,并评估医院整体综合指南依从性是否与观察到的以及风险调整后的住院死亡率相关。
设计、设置和参与者:对美国350个学术和非学术中心的医院护理进行观察性分析,这些中心在2001年1月1日至2003年9月30日期间纳入了64775名参加CRUSADE(不稳定型心绞痛患者快速风险分层能否通过早期实施ACC/AHA指南抑制不良结局)国家质量改进倡议的患者,这些患者表现为胸痛且心电图改变阳性或心脏生物标志物与非ST段抬高型急性冠状动脉综合征(ACS)一致。
使用9种ACC/AHA I类指南推荐的治疗方法,以及各医院个体护理流程使用情况之间的相关性和整体综合依从率。
总体而言,在74%的符合条件的病例中遵循了9种ACC/AHA指南推荐的治疗方法。个体ACS流程指标之间医院绩效的相关性适中。然而,综合依从表现差异很大(从最低到最高医院四分位数的中位数[四分位间距]综合依从得分,63%[59%-66%]对82%[80%-84%])。综合指南依从率与住院死亡率显著相关,观察到的死亡率从最低依从四分位数的6.31%降至最高依从四分位数的4.15%(P<.001)。风险调整后,医院综合依从性每增加10%,其患者住院死亡可能性相应降低10%(调整后的优势比,0.90;95%置信区间,0.84-0.97;P<.001)。
发现护理流程与结果之间存在显著关联,支持使用广泛的、基于指南的绩效指标作为评估和帮助改善医院质量的一种手段。