Etzioni David A, Lessow Cynthia L, Lucas Heather D, Merchea Amit, Madura James A, Mahabir Raman, Mishra Nitin, Wasif Nabil, Mathur Amit K, Chang Yu-Hui H, Cima Robert R, Habermann Elizabeth B
Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Scottsdale, AZ.
Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Surgical Outcomes Program, Scottsdale, AZ.
Ann Surg. 2018 Jan;267(1):81-87. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002041.
To characterize reasons for discordance between administrative data and registry data in the determination of postoperative infectious complications.
Data regarding the occurrence of postoperative surgical complications are identified through either administrative or registry data. Rates of complications vary significantly between these two types of data; the reasons for this are not well-understood.
The occurrence of 30-day inpatient infectious complications (pneumonia, sepsis, surgical site infection, and urinary tract infection) was compared between the NSQIP and administrative mechanisms at 4 academic hospitals between 2012 and 2014. In each situation where the NSQIP and administrative data were discordant regarding the occurrence of a specific complication, a 2-clinician chart abstraction was performed to characterize the reasons for discordance as (i) administrative coding error, (ii) NSQIP coding error, (iii) "question of criteria", where the discordance was the result of differences in criteria, or (iv) "dually incorrect", where both data sources coded the complication incorrectly.
The cohort included 19,163 patients undergoing surgery in 4 different academic hospitals. Rates of infectious complications varied up to 5-fold between the two data sources. A total of 717 discordant complications were identified. Of these, the greatest portion (43%) was due to "question of criteria," followed by administrative coding error (37%), NSQIP error (15%), and dually incorrect (5%).
With a goal of improving existing mechanisms for measuring surgical quality, definitions for the occurrence of a postoperative complication need to be developed and applied consistently. Progress toward this goal will enable patients and payers to better take advantage of recent advances in healthcare data transparency.
确定术后感染性并发症时,明确管理数据与登记数据不一致的原因。
术后手术并发症发生情况的数据可通过管理数据或登记数据来确定。这两种数据类型之间的并发症发生率差异显著;其原因尚不清楚。
比较2012年至2014年期间4家学术医院的国家外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)和管理机制中30天住院感染性并发症(肺炎、败血症、手术部位感染和尿路感染)的发生情况。在NSQIP和管理数据在特定并发症发生情况上不一致的每种情况下,由两名临床医生进行病历摘要,以将不一致的原因描述为:(i)管理编码错误,(ii)NSQIP编码错误,(iii)“标准问题”,即不一致是标准差异的结果,或(iv)“双方均错误”,即两个数据源对并发症的编码均错误。
该队列包括4家不同学术医院的19163例接受手术的患者。两种数据源之间的感染性并发症发生率差异高达5倍。共识别出717例不一致的并发症。其中,最大部分(43%)是由于“标准问题”,其次是管理编码错误(37%)、NSQIP错误(15%)和双方均错误(5%)。
以改进现有手术质量测量机制为目标,需要制定并始终如一地应用术后并发症发生情况的定义。朝着这一目标取得的进展将使患者和支付方能够更好地利用医疗数据透明度方面的最新进展。