Alyesh Daniel M, Seth Milan, Miller David C, Dupree James M, Syrjamaki John, Sukul Devraj, Dixon Simon, Kerr Eve A, Gurm Hitinder S, Nallamothu Brahmajee K
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Department of Internal Medicine (D.M.A., D.S., H.S.G., B.K.N.)
University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan Cardiovascular Collaborative, Ann Arbor, MI (M.S., H.S.G.).
Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2018 Jun;11(6):e004328. doi: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.117.004328.
Assessments of healthcare value have largely focused on measuring outcomes of care at a given level of cost with less attention paid to appropriateness. However, understanding how appropriateness relates to outcomes and costs is essential to determining healthcare value.
In a retrospective cohort study design, administrative data from fee-for-service Medicare patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) in Michigan hospitals between June 30, 2010, and December 31, 2014, were linked with clinical data from a statewide PCI registry to calculate hospital-level measures of (1) appropriate use criteria scores, (2) 90-day risk-standardized readmission and mortality rates, and (3) 90-day risk-standardized episode costs. We then used Spearman correlation coefficients to assess the relationship between these measures. A total of 29 839 PCIs were performed at 33 PCI hospitals during the study period. A total of 13.3% were for ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, 25.0% for non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction, 47.1% for unstable angina, 9.8% for stable angina, and 4.7% for other. The overall hospital-level mean appropriate use criteria score was 8.4±0.2. Ninety-day risk-standardized readmission occurred in 23.7%±3.7% of cases, 90-day risk-standardized mortality in 4.3%±0.6%, and mean risk-standardized episode costs were $26 159±$1074. Hospital-level appropriate use criteria scores did not correlate with 90-day readmission, mortality, or episode costs.
Among Medicare patients undergoing PCI in Michigan, we found hospital-level appropriate use criteria scores did not correlate with 90-day readmission, mortality, or episode costs. This finding suggests that a comprehensive understanding of healthcare value requires multidimensional consideration of appropriateness, outcomes, and costs.
医疗保健价值评估主要集中在以给定成本水平衡量医疗结果,而对适宜性的关注较少。然而,了解适宜性与结果和成本之间的关系对于确定医疗保健价值至关重要。
在一项回顾性队列研究设计中,将2010年6月30日至2014年12月31日期间在密歇根州医院接受经皮冠状动脉介入治疗(PCI)的按服务收费的医疗保险患者的行政数据与全州PCI登记处的临床数据相链接,以计算医院层面的以下指标:(1)合理使用标准分数;(2)90天风险标准化再入院率和死亡率;(3)90天风险标准化发作成本。然后,我们使用斯皮尔曼相关系数来评估这些指标之间的关系。在研究期间,33家PCI医院共进行了29839例PCI手术。其中,13.3%为ST段抬高型心肌梗死,25.0%为非ST段抬高型心肌梗死,47.1%为不稳定型心绞痛,9.8%为稳定型心绞痛,4.7%为其他情况。医院层面的总体合理使用标准平均分数为8.4±0.2。90天风险标准化再入院率为23.7%±3.7%,90天风险标准化死亡率为4.3%±0.6%,平均风险标准化发作成本为26159美元±1074美元。医院层面的合理使用标准分数与90天再入院率、死亡率或发作成本均无相关性。
在密歇根州接受PCI的医疗保险患者中,我们发现医院层面的合理使用标准分数与90天再入院率、死亡率或发作成本均无相关性。这一发现表明,对医疗保健价值的全面理解需要对适宜性、结果和成本进行多维度考量。