Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ.
Mayo Clinic Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Surgical Outcomes Program, Scottsdale, AZ.
Ann Surg. 2020 Jan;271(1):94-99. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002780.
To characterize agreement in the ascertainment of surgical site infections (SSIs) between the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN), and administrative data.
The NSQIP, NHSN, and administrative data are the primary systems used to monitor and report SSIs for the purpose of quality control and benchmarking of hospitals and surgeons. These systems have different methods for identifying SSIs.
We queried the NHSN, NSQIP, and administrative data systems for patients who had an operation at 1 of 4 hospitals within a single health system between January 2013 and September 2015. The detection of an SSI during a postoperative hospitalization was the outcome of analysis. Any SSI detected by one (or more) of these systems was analyzed by 2 reviewers to determine the presence of discrete elements of documentation constituting evidence of SSI. Concordance between the 3 systems (NHSN, NSQIP, and administrative data) was analyzed using Cohen's kappa.
After application of appropriate exclusion criteria, a cohort of 9447 inpatient operations was analyzed. In total, 130 SSIs were detected by 1 or more of the 3 systems, with reported SSI rates of 0.5% (NHSN), 0.7% (administrative data), and 1.0% (NSQIP). Of these 130 SSIs, only 17 SSIs were reported by all 3 systems. The concordance between these 3 systems was moderate (kappa values NSQIP-NHSN = 0.50 [0.40-0.60], administrative-NHSN = 0.36 [0.24-0.47], and administrative-NSQIP = 0.47 [0.38-0.57]). Chart review found that reasons for discordance were related to issues of different criteria as well as inaccuracies.
There is significant discordance in the determination of SSIs reported by the NHSN, NSQIP, and administrative data. The differences and limitations of each of these systems have to be recognized, especially when using these data for quality reports and pay for performance.
描述国家外科质量改进计划(NSQIP)、国家医疗保健安全网络(NHSN)和行政数据之间在手术部位感染(SSI)确定方面的一致性。
NSQIP、NHSN 和行政数据是用于监测和报告 SSI 的主要系统,目的是为医院和外科医生的质量控制和基准测试提供依据。这些系统有不同的方法来识别 SSI。
我们查询了 NHSN、NSQIP 和行政数据系统,以确定在 2013 年 1 月至 2015 年 9 月期间在单一医疗系统内的 4 家医院之一接受手术的患者。术后住院期间发生的 SSI 是分析的结果。通过其中一个(或多个)系统检测到的任何 SSI 均由 2 名审核员进行分析,以确定构成 SSI 证据的离散文档元素的存在。使用 Cohen's kappa 分析 3 个系统(NHSN、NSQIP 和行政数据)之间的一致性。
应用适当的排除标准后,分析了 9447 例住院手术患者的队列。共有 130 例 SSI 通过 3 个系统中的 1 个或多个系统检测到,报告的 SSI 率分别为 0.5%(NHSN)、0.7%(行政数据)和 1.0%(NSQIP)。在这 130 例 SSI 中,只有 17 例 SSI 被 3 个系统均报告。这 3 个系统之间的一致性为中等(NSQIP-NHSN 的 kappa 值为 0.50 [0.40-0.60],行政-NHSN 为 0.36 [0.24-0.47],行政-NSQIP 为 0.47 [0.38-0.57])。图表审查发现,不一致的原因与不同标准以及不准确的问题有关。
NHSN、NSQIP 和行政数据报告的 SSI 确定存在显著差异。在使用这些数据进行质量报告和绩效付费时,必须认识到这些系统的差异和局限性。