Ann Intern Med. 2014 Mar 18;160(6):380-8. doi: 10.7326/M13-1419.
Most U.S. hospitals publicly report 30-day risk-standardized mortality rates for pneumonia. Rates exclude severe cases, which may be assigned a secondary diagnosis of pneumonia and a principal diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure. By assigning sepsis and respiratory failure codes more liberally, hospitals might improve their reported performance.
To examine the effect of the definition of pneumonia on hospital mortality rates.
Cross-sectional study.
329 U.S. hospitals.
Adults hospitalized for pneumonia (as a principal diagnosis or secondary diagnosis paired with a principal diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure) between 2007 and 2010.
Proportion of patients with pneumonia coded with a principal diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure and risk-standardized mortality rates excluding versus including a principal diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure.
When the definition of pneumonia was limited to patients with a principal diagnosis of pneumonia, the risk-standardized mortality rate was significantly better than the mean in 4.3% of hospitals and significantly worse in 6.4%. When the definition was broadened to include patients with a principal diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure, this rate was better than the mean in 11.9% of hospitals and worse in 22.8% and the outlier status of 28.3% of hospitals changed. Among hospitals in the highest quintile of proportion of patients coded with a principal diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure, outlier status under the broader definition improved in 7.6% and worsened in 40.9%. Among those in the lowest quintile, 20.0% improved and none worsened.
Only inpatient mortality was studied.
Variation in use of the principal diagnosis of sepsis or respiratory failure may bias efforts to compare hospital performance regarding pneumonia outcomes.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
大多数美国医院会公开报告肺炎的 30 天风险标准化死亡率。这些数据排除了重症病例,这些病例可能被二次诊断为肺炎,并被主要诊断为败血症或呼吸衰竭。通过更自由地分配败血症和呼吸衰竭的代码,医院可能会提高其报告的绩效。
研究肺炎定义对医院死亡率的影响。
横断面研究。
329 家美国医院。
2007 年至 2010 年期间因肺炎(作为主要诊断或次要诊断与败血症或呼吸衰竭的主要诊断同时存在)住院的成年人。
以败血症或呼吸衰竭为主要诊断编码的肺炎患者比例,以及排除和包括败血症或呼吸衰竭主要诊断的风险标准化死亡率。
当肺炎的定义仅限于主要诊断为肺炎的患者时,在 4.3%的医院中,风险标准化死亡率明显好于平均值,而在 6.4%的医院中则明显差于平均值。当定义放宽到包括主要诊断为败血症或呼吸衰竭的患者时,在 11.9%的医院中,该比率好于平均值,在 22.8%的医院中差于平均值,并且 28.3%的医院的异常状态发生了变化。在主要诊断为败血症或呼吸衰竭的患者比例最高的五分之一的医院中,根据更广泛的定义,异常状态在 7.6%的医院中得到改善,在 40.9%的医院中恶化。在比例最低的五分之一医院中,有 20.0%的医院得到改善,没有医院恶化。
仅研究了住院死亡率。
在使用败血症或呼吸衰竭的主要诊断方面的差异可能会影响比较医院肺炎治疗结果的绩效的努力。
医疗保健研究和质量局。