Bekelis Kimon, Missios Symeon, MacKenzie Todd A
Department of Neurosurgery, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA
The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, Lebanon, NH.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Apr 18;6(4):e005880. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.117.005880.
It is not clear whether Magnet recognition by the American Nurses Credentialing Center (nursing excellence program) is associated with improved patient outcomes. We investigated whether hospitalization in a Magnet hospital is associated with improved outcomes for patients with ischemic stroke.
We performed a cohort study of patients with ischemic stroke from 2009 to 2013, who were registered in the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database. Propensity-score-adjusted multivariable regression models were used to adjust for known confounders, with mixed effects methods to control for clustering at the facility level. An instrumental variable analysis was used to control for unmeasured confounding and simulate the effect of a randomized trial. During the study period, 176 557 patients were admitted for ischemic stroke, and met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 32 092 (18.2%) were hospitalized in Magnet hospitals, and 144 465 (81.8%) in non-Magnet institutions. Instrumental variable analysis demonstrated that hospitalization in Magnet hospitals was associated with lower case-fatality (adjusted difference, -23.9%; 95% CI, -29.0% to -18.7%), length of stay (adjusted difference, -0.4; 95% CI, -0.8 to -0.1), and rate of discharge to a facility (adjusted difference, -16.5%; 95% CI, -20.0% to -13.0%) in comparison to non-Magnet hospitals. The same associations were present in propensity-score-adjusted mixed effects models.
Using a comprehensive all-payer cohort of patients with ischemic stroke in New York State, we identified an association of treatment in Magnet hospitals with lower case-fatality, discharge to a facility, and length of stay. Further research into the factors contributing to the superiority of Magnet hospitals in stroke care is warranted.
美国护士资格认证中心的磁体识别(护理卓越项目)是否与改善患者结局相关尚不清楚。我们调查了在磁体医院住院是否与缺血性脑卒中患者的结局改善相关。
我们对2009年至2013年在纽约州全州规划与研究合作系统数据库中登记的缺血性脑卒中患者进行了一项队列研究。采用倾向得分调整的多变量回归模型对已知混杂因素进行调整,采用混合效应方法控制机构层面的聚类。使用工具变量分析来控制未测量的混杂因素并模拟随机试验的效果。在研究期间,176557例患者因缺血性脑卒中入院并符合纳入标准。其中,32092例(18.2%)在磁体医院住院,144465例(81.8%)在非磁体机构住院。工具变量分析表明,与非磁体医院相比,在磁体医院住院与较低的病死率(调整差异,-23.9%;95%CI,-29.0%至-18.7%)、住院时间(调整差异,-0.4;95%CI,-0.8至-0.1)和转至其他机构的出院率(调整差异,-16.5%;95%CI,-20.0%至-13.0%)相关。倾向得分调整的混合效应模型中也存在相同的关联。
通过对纽约州缺血性脑卒中患者的全付费综合队列研究,我们发现磁体医院的治疗与较低的病死率、转至其他机构的出院率和住院时间相关。有必要进一步研究导致磁体医院在卒中护理方面具有优势的因素。