Suppr超能文献

用于奖励医疗质量的综合衡量方法比较:来自美国心脏协会“遵循指南”项目的分析

Comparison of composite measure methodologies for rewarding quality of care: an analysis from the American Heart Association's Get With The Guidelines program.

作者信息

Eapen Zubin J, Fonarow Gregg C, Dai David, O'Brien Sean M, Schwamm Lee H, Cannon Christopher P, Heidenreich Paul A, Bhatt Deepak L, Peterson Eric D, Hernandez Adrian F

机构信息

Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC.

出版信息

Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2011 Nov 1;4(6):610-8. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.111.961391. Epub 2011 Oct 18.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Composite indices of health care performance are an aggregation of underlying individual performance measures and are increasingly being used to rank hospitals. We sought to conduct an observational analysis to determine the influence of the opportunity-based and all-or-none composite performance measures on hospital rankings.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We examined 194 245 patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction between July 2006 and June 2009 from 334 hospitals participating in the Get With The Guidelines--Coronary Artery Disease (GWTG-CAD) quality improvement program. We analyzed hospital opportunity-based and all-or-none composite scores and 30-day risk-standardized all-cause mortality and readmission rates. We found that the median calculated opportunity-based score for these hospitals was 95.5 (interquartile range, 90.4, 98.0). The median all-or-none score was 88.9 (interquartile range, 79.7, 94.4). The 2 scoring methods were significantly correlated with one another (r=0.98, P<0.001). Rankings generated by the two methods were significantly correlated (r=0.93, P<0.001). The two methods had a modest correlation with the 30-day risk-standardized mortality rate (opportunity-based score: r=-0.25, P<0.001; all-or-none score: r=-0.24, P<0.001). Neither composite measure correlated with the 30-day risk-standardized readmission rate. Over time, the number of hospitals new to the top and bottom quintiles of hospital rankings diminished similarly for both composite measures. When including additional performance measures into the composite score, the two methods produced similar changes in hospital rankings.

CONCLUSIONS

The opportunity-based and all-or-none coronary artery disease composite indices are highly correlated and yield similar ranking of the top and bottom quintiles of hospitals. The two methods provide similarly modest correlations with 30-day mortality, but not readmission.

摘要

背景

医疗保健绩效综合指数是对基础个体绩效指标的汇总,越来越多地用于对医院进行排名。我们试图进行一项观察性分析,以确定基于机会的和全或无的综合绩效指标对医院排名的影响。

方法与结果

我们检查了2006年7月至2009年6月期间参与“遵循指南——冠状动脉疾病(GWTG-CAD)”质量改进项目的334家医院中因急性心肌梗死住院的194245例患者。我们分析了医院基于机会的和全或无的综合评分以及30天风险标准化全因死亡率和再入院率。我们发现,这些医院基于机会的计算得分中位数为95.5(四分位间距,90.4,98.0)。全或无评分中位数为88.9(四分位间距,79.7,94.4)。这两种评分方法彼此显著相关(r = 0.98,P < 0.001)。两种方法生成的排名显著相关(r = 0.93,P < 0.001)。这两种方法与30天风险标准化死亡率有适度相关性(基于机会的得分:r = -0.25,P < 0.001;全或无得分:r = -0.24,P < 0.001)。两种综合指标均与30天风险标准化再入院率无相关性。随着时间的推移,两种综合指标在医院排名最高和最低五分位数中新出现的医院数量减少情况相似。当将额外的绩效指标纳入综合评分时,两种方法在医院排名中产生了相似的变化。

结论

基于机会的和全或无的冠状动脉疾病综合指数高度相关,并且在医院最高和最低五分位数的排名中产生相似结果。这两种方法与30天死亡率的相关性同样适度,但与再入院率无关。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验