Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Center for Healthcare Outcomes and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2014 Apr;97(4):1214-8. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2013.11.048. Epub 2014 Feb 1.
Recent policy interventions have reduced payments to hospitals with higher-than-predicted risk-adjusted readmission rates. However, whether readmission rates reliably discriminate deficiencies in hospital quality is uncertain. We sought to determine the reliability of 30-day readmission rates after cardiac operations as a measure of hospital performance and evaluate the effect of hospital caseload on reliability.
We examined national Medicare beneficiaries undergoing coronary artery bypass graft operations for 2006 to 2008 (n=244,874 patients, n=1,210 hospitals). First, we performed multivariable logistic regression examining patient factors to calculate a risk-adjusted readmission rate for each hospital. We then used hierarchical modeling to estimate the reliability of this quality measure for each hospital. Finally, we determined the proportion of total variation attributable to three factors: true signal, statistical noise, and patient factors.
A median of 151 (25% to 75% interquartile range, 79 to 265) coronary artery bypasses were performed per hospital during the 3-year period. The median risk-adjusted 30-day readmission rate was 17.6% (25% to 75% interquartile range, 14.4% to 20.8%). Of the variation in readmission rates, 55% was explained by measurement noise, 4% could be attributed to patient characteristics, and the remaining 41% represented true signal in readmission rates. Only 53 hospitals (4.4%) achieved a proficient level of reliability exceeding 0.70. To achieve this reliability, 599 cases were required during the 3-year period. In 33.7% of hospitals, a moderate degree of reliability exceeding 0.5 was achieved, which required 218 cases.
The vast majority of hospitals do not achieve a minimum acceptable level of reliability for 30-day readmission rates. Despite recent enthusiasm, readmission rates are not a reliable measure of hospital quality in cardiac surgery.
最近的政策干预措施降低了预测风险调整后再入院率较高的医院的支付金额。然而,再入院率是否能可靠地区分医院质量的不足尚不确定。我们试图确定心脏手术后 30 天再入院率作为医院绩效衡量标准的可靠性,并评估医院病例量对可靠性的影响。
我们检查了 2006 年至 2008 年期间接受冠状动脉旁路移植手术的全国医疗保险受益人(n=244874 名患者,n=1210 家医院)。首先,我们进行了多变量逻辑回归分析,以检查患者因素,为每家医院计算风险调整后的再入院率。然后,我们使用层次模型估计该质量指标在每家医院的可靠性。最后,我们确定了总变异归因于三个因素的比例:真实信号、统计噪声和患者因素。
在 3 年期间,每家医院中位数完成 151 例(25%至 75%分位数范围,79 至 265)冠状动脉旁路移植术。中位数风险调整后 30 天再入院率为 17.6%(25%至 75%分位数范围,14.4%至 20.8%)。再入院率的变化中,55%由测量噪声解释,4%可归因于患者特征,其余 41%代表再入院率中的真实信号。只有 53 家(4.4%)医院达到了超过 0.70 的熟练可靠性水平。要达到这个可靠性,在 3 年期间需要 599 例。在 33.7%的医院中,达到了超过 0.5 的中度可靠性,这需要 218 例。
绝大多数医院无法达到 30 天再入院率的最低可接受可靠性水平。尽管最近受到关注,但再入院率并不是心脏手术中衡量医院质量的可靠指标。