Suppr超能文献

再入院率是一个有效的质量指标吗?证据综述。

Is the readmission rate a valid quality indicator? A review of the evidence.

作者信息

Fischer Claudia, Lingsma Hester F, Marang-van de Mheen Perla J, Kringos Dionne S, Klazinga Niek S, Steyerberg Ewout W

机构信息

Department of Public Health, Centre for Medical Decision Making, Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.

Department of Medical Decision Making, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, the Netherlands.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2014 Nov 7;9(11):e112282. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112282. eCollection 2014.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Hospital readmission rates are increasingly used for both quality improvement and cost control. However, the validity of readmission rates as a measure of quality of hospital care is not evident. We aimed to give an overview of the different methodological aspects in the definition and measurement of readmission rates that need to be considered when interpreting readmission rates as a reflection of quality of care.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic literature review, using the bibliographic databases Embase, Medline OvidSP, Web-of-Science, Cochrane central and PubMed for the period of January 2001 to May 2013.

RESULTS

The search resulted in 102 included papers. We found that definition of the context in which readmissions are used as a quality indicator is crucial. This context includes the patient group and the specific aspects of care of which the quality is aimed to be assessed. Methodological flaws like unreliable data and insufficient case-mix correction may confound the comparison of readmission rates between hospitals. Another problem occurs when the basic distinction between planned and unplanned readmissions cannot be made. Finally, the multi-faceted nature of quality of care and the correlation between readmissions and other outcomes limit the indicator's validity.

CONCLUSIONS

Although readmission rates are a promising quality indicator, several methodological concerns identified in this study need to be addressed, especially when the indicator is intended for accountability or pay for performance. We recommend investing resources in accurate data registration, improved indicator description, and bundling outcome measures to provide a more complete picture of hospital care.

摘要

引言

医院再入院率越来越多地用于质量改进和成本控制。然而,再入院率作为衡量医院护理质量的指标,其有效性并不明显。我们旨在概述在将再入院率解释为护理质量的反映时,定义和测量再入院率所需考虑的不同方法学方面。

方法

我们进行了一项系统的文献综述,使用Embase、Medline OvidSP、Web of Science、Cochrane中心和PubMed等文献数据库,检索2001年1月至2013年5月期间的文献。

结果

检索结果纳入了102篇论文。我们发现,将再入院作为质量指标的使用背景的定义至关重要。这一背景包括患者群体以及旨在评估质量的护理的具体方面。数据不可靠和病例组合校正不足等方法学缺陷可能会混淆医院之间再入院率的比较。当无法区分计划内和计划外再入院时,会出现另一个问题。最后,护理质量的多面性以及再入院与其他结果之间的相关性限制了该指标的有效性。

结论

尽管再入院率是一个很有前景的质量指标,但本研究中确定的几个方法学问题需要解决,尤其是当该指标用于问责或绩效付费时。我们建议投入资源进行准确的数据登记、改进指标描述,并整合结果测量,以更全面地了解医院护理情况。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1964/4224424/8c40a379950b/pone.0112282.g001.jpg

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