Hefner Jennifer L, Huerta Timothy R, McAlearney Ann Scheck, Barash Barbara, Latimer Tina, Moffatt-Bruce Susan D
Department of Family Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Department of Biomedical Informatics, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2017 Mar 1;24(2):310-315. doi: 10.1093/jamia/ocw126.
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) software applies standardized algorithms to hospital administrative data to identify patient safety indicators (PSIs). The objective of this study was to assess the validity of PSI flags and report reasons for invalid flagging.
At a 6-hospital academic medical center, a retrospective analysis was conducted of all PSIs flagged in fiscal year 2014. A multidisciplinary PSI Quality Team reviewed each flagged PSI based on quarterly reports. The positive predictive value (PPV, the percent of clinically validated cases) was calculated for 12 PSI categories. The documentation for each reversed case was reviewed to determine the reasons for PSI reversal.
Of 657 PSI flags, 185 were reversed. Seven PSI categories had a PPV below 75%. Four broad categories of reasons for reversal were AHRQ algorithm limitations (38%), coding misinterpretations (45%), present upon admission (10%), and documentation insufficiency (7%). AHRQ algorithm limitations included 2 subcategories: an "incident" was inherent to the procedure, or highly likely (eg, vascular tumor bleed), or an "incident" was nonsignificant, easily controlled, and/or no intervention was needed.
These findings support previous research highlighting administrative data problems. Additionally, AHRQ algorithm limitations was an emergent category not considered in previous research. Herein we present potential solutions to address these issues.
If, despite poor validity, US policy continues to rely on PSIs for incentive and penalty programs, improvements are needed in the quality of administrative data and the standardized PSI algorithms. These solutions require national motivation, research attention, and dissemination support.
医疗保健研究与质量局(AHRQ)软件应用标准化算法处理医院管理数据,以识别患者安全指标(PSI)。本研究的目的是评估PSI标记的有效性,并报告标记无效的原因。
在一家拥有6家医院的学术医疗中心,对2014财年标记的所有PSI进行回顾性分析。一个多学科的PSI质量团队根据季度报告对每个标记的PSI进行审查。计算了12个PSI类别的阳性预测值(PPV,临床验证病例的百分比)。对每个逆转病例的文档进行审查,以确定PSI逆转的原因。
在657个PSI标记中,185个被逆转。7个PSI类别PPV低于75%。逆转的四大类原因是AHRQ算法局限性(38%)、编码误解(45%)、入院时存在(10%)和文档不足(7%)。AHRQ算法局限性包括两个子类别:“事件”是手术固有的、或极有可能发生(如血管肿瘤出血),或“事件”不显著、易于控制且/或无需干预。
这些发现支持了此前强调管理数据问题的研究。此外,AHRQ算法局限性是此前研究未考虑的一个新出现的类别。在此我们提出了解决这些问题的潜在方案。
如果尽管有效性不佳,但美国政策继续依赖PSI实施激励和惩罚计划,那么管理数据质量和标准化PSI算法都需要改进。这些解决方案需要国家层面的推动、研究关注和传播支持。