Girotra Saket, Lu Xin, Popescu Ioana, Vaughan-Sarrazin Mary, Horwitz Phillip A, Cram Peter
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, Iowa City, 52242, USA.
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2010 Nov;3(6):607-14. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.110.943282. Epub 2010 Oct 5.
Hospital volume has been widely embraced as a proxy measure for hospital quality; little attention has been focused on an alternative quality measure-hospital specialization. Even though specialization occurs on a continuum, previous studies have only focused on a small number of highly specialized hospitals (single-specialty hospitals). Studies on the broad relationship between hospital specialization and outcomes after coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) are limited.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 705 084 Medicare patients (1130 hospitals) who underwent CABG during 2001 to 2005. We stratified hospitals into quintiles, based on their degree of cardiac specialization (proportion of a hospital's Medicare discharges classified as Major Diagnostic Category 5-cardiovascular diseases). We compared patient and hospital characteristics and outcomes across quintiles of cardiac specialization. Patient characteristics were generally similar across quintiles, but mean annual CABG volume increased progressively from quintile 1 (least specialized) to quintile 5 (most specialized). Unadjusted 30-day mortality was similar at hospitals in quintiles 1 to 4 (4.8%), except quintile 5, where mortality was lower (4.3%). A strong inverse association was seen between hospital cardiac specialization and 30-day mortality after adjustment for patient characteristics (P(trend)=0.001). However, this was no longer significant after additional adjustment for CABG volume (P(trend)=0.65). Results were similar for other mortality outcomes and length of stay.
After accounting for patient characteristics and CABG volume, greater cardiac specialization was not associated with clinically significant improvement in patient outcomes. This study calls into question the benefit of cardiac specialization for the vast majority of CABG-performing US hospitals.
医院规模已被广泛用作衡量医院质量的替代指标;而另一种质量衡量指标——医院专科化却很少受到关注。尽管专科化存在一个连续体,但以往研究仅聚焦于少数高度专科化的医院(单一专科医院)。关于医院专科化与冠状动脉旁路移植术(CABG)后结局之间广泛关系的研究有限。
我们对2001年至2005年间接受CABG的705084名医疗保险患者(1130家医院)进行了一项回顾性队列研究。我们根据医院的心脏专科化程度(医院医疗保险出院病例中归类为主要诊断类别5——心血管疾病的比例)将医院分为五等份。我们比较了不同心脏专科化五等份的患者和医院特征及结局。各五等份的患者特征总体相似,但平均每年的CABG手术量从第1等份(专科化程度最低)到第5等份(专科化程度最高)逐渐增加。第1至4等份医院的未调整30天死亡率相似(4.8%),第5等份医院除外,其死亡率较低(4.3%)。在对患者特征进行调整后,医院心脏专科化与30天死亡率之间存在强烈的负相关(P趋势=0.001)。然而,在对CABG手术量进行额外调整后,这种相关性不再显著(P趋势=0.65)。其他死亡率结局和住院时间的结果相似。
在考虑患者特征和CABG手术量后,更高的心脏专科化与患者结局的临床显著改善无关。这项研究对美国绝大多数进行CABG手术的医院心脏专科化的益处提出了质疑。