Chang Tiffany E, Krumholz Harlan M, Li Shu-Xia, Martin John, Ranasinghe Isuru
Department of Chronic Disease Epidemiology, Yale School of Public Health, New Haven, CT Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT.
Center for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale-New Haven Hospital, New Haven, CT Section of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program, Department of Internal Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, CT Department of Health Policy and Management, School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, CT.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Sep 14;5(9):e003680. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.003680.
The availability of hospital cardiac services may vary between hospitals and influence care processes and outcomes. However, data on available cardiac services are restricted to a limited number of services collected by the American Hospital Association (AHA) annual survey. We developed an alternative method to identify hospital services using individual patient discharge data for acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in the Premier Healthcare Database.
Thirty-five inpatient cardiac services relevant for AMI care were identified using American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines. Thirty-one of these services could be defined using patient-level administrative data codes, such as International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification and Current Procedural Terminology codes. A hospital was classified as providing a service if it had ≥5 instances for the service in the Premier database from 2009 to 2011. Using this system, the availability of these services among 432 Premier hospitals ranged from 100% (services such as chest X-ray) to 1.2% (heart transplant service). To measure the accuracy of this method using administrative data, we calculated agreement between the AHA survey and Premier for a subset of 16 services defined by both sources. There was a high percentage of agreement (≥80%) for 11 of 16 (68.8%) services, moderate agreement for 3 of 16 (18.8%) services, and low agreement (≤50%) for 2 of 16 services (12.5%).
The availability of cardiac services for AMI care varies widely among hospitals. Using individual patient discharge data is a feasible method to identify these cardiac services, particularly for those services pertaining to inpatient care.
医院心脏服务的可及性在不同医院间可能存在差异,并会影响护理流程及结果。然而,关于现有心脏服务的数据仅限于美国医院协会(AHA)年度调查所收集的有限数量的服务项目。我们开发了一种替代方法,利用Premier医疗数据库中急性心肌梗死(AMI)患者的个体出院数据来识别医院服务。
依据美国心脏协会/美国心脏病学会指南,确定了35项与AMI护理相关的住院心脏服务。其中31项服务可通过患者层面的管理数据编码来定义,如国际疾病分类第九版临床修订本(ICD-9-CM)及现行手术操作术语(CPT)编码。若一家医院在2009年至2011年的Premier数据库中某项服务出现≥5次,则该医院被归类为提供了此项服务。运用该系统,432家Premier医院中这些服务的可及性范围从100%(如胸部X光检查等服务)到1.2%(心脏移植服务)。为使用管理数据来衡量该方法的准确性,我们计算了AHA调查与Premier针对双方均定义的16项服务子集的一致性。16项服务中有11项(68.8%)一致性较高(≥80%),3项(18.8%)一致性中等,2项(12.5%)一致性较低(≤50%)。
医院间用于AMI护理的心脏服务可及性差异很大。利用个体患者出院数据是识别这些心脏服务的可行方法,尤其对于那些与住院护理相关的服务。