Texas Quality Initiative, Irving, Tex; The Heart Hospital Baylor Plano, Plano, Tex.
Texas Quality Initiative, Irving, Tex; Department of Clinical Research, Medical City, Dallas, Tex.
J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2018 May;155(5):2043-2047. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2017.11.071. Epub 2017 Dec 5.
Readmission rates after cardiac surgery are being used as a quality indicator; they are also being collected by Medicare and are tied to reimbursement. Accurate knowledge of readmission rates may be difficult to achieve because patients may be readmitted to different hospitals. In our area, 81 hospitals share administrative claims data; 28 of these hospitals (from 5 different hospital systems) do cardiac surgery and share Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) clinical data. We used these 2 sources to compare the readmissions data for accuracy.
A total of 45,539 STS records from January 2008 to December 2016 were matched with the hospital billing data records. Using the index visit as the start date, the billing records were queried for any subsequent in-patient visits for that patient. The billing records included date of readmission and hospital of readmission data and were compared with the data captured in the STS record.
We found 1153 (2.5%) patients who had STS records that were marked "No" or "missing," but there were billing records that showed a readmission. The reported STS readmission rate of 4796 (10.5%) underreported the readmission rate by 2.5 actual percentage points. The true rate should have been 13.0%. Actual readmission rate was 23.8% higher than reported by the clinical database. Approximately 36% of readmissions were to a hospital that was a part of a different hospital system.
It is important to know accurate readmission rates for quality improvement processes and institutional financial planning. Matching patient records to an administrative database showed that the clinical database may fail to capture many readmissions. Combining data with an administrative database can enhance accuracy of reporting.
心脏手术后的再入院率被用作质量指标;医疗保险也在收集这些数据,并将其与报销挂钩。由于患者可能会被转至不同的医院,因此准确了解再入院率可能较为困难。在我们所在的地区,有 81 家医院共享管理索赔数据;其中 28 家(来自 5 家不同的医院系统)进行心脏手术,并共享胸外科医师学会(STS)临床数据。我们使用这两个来源来比较再入院数据的准确性。
我们将 2008 年 1 月至 2016 年 12 月期间的总共 45539 份 STS 记录与医院计费数据记录进行匹配。以索引就诊日期为起始日期,查询该患者的任何后续住院就诊记录。计费记录包括再入院日期和再入院医院的数据,并与 STS 记录中捕获的数据进行比较。
我们发现有 1153 名(2.5%)患者的 STS 记录标记为“否”或“缺失”,但计费记录显示有再入院。STS 记录报告的再入院率为 4796(10.5%),比实际再入院率低 2.5 个百分点。实际再入院率应达到 13.0%。实际再入院率比临床数据库报告的高出 23.8%。大约 36%的再入院发生在与患者最初接受治疗的医院系统不同的医院。
了解准确的再入院率对于质量改进过程和机构财务规划非常重要。将患者记录与管理数据库进行匹配表明,临床数据库可能无法捕捉到许多再入院情况。将数据与管理数据库相结合可以提高报告的准确性。