Osler Turner, Yuan Dekang, Holden Jeremy, Huang Zihao, Cook Alan, Glance Laurent G, Buzas Jeffrey S, Hosmer David W
University of Vermont, 789 Orchard Shore Road, Colchester, VT 05446, United States.
University of Vermont, United States.
Injury. 2019 Jan;50(1):173-177. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2018.08.021. Epub 2018 Aug 27.
Readmission following hospital discharge is both common and costly. The Hospital Readmission Reduction Program (HRRP) financially penalizes hospitals for readmission following admission for some conditions, but this approach may not be appropriate for all conditions. We wished to determine if hospitals differed in their adjusted readmission rates following an index hospital admission for traumatic injury.
We extracted from the AHRQ National Readmission Dataset (NRD) all non-elderly adult patients hospitalized following traumatic injury in 2014. We estimated hierarchal logistic regression models to predicted readmission within 30 days. Models included either patient level predictors, hospital level predictors, or both. We quantified the extent of hospital variability in readmissions using the median odds ratio. Additionally, we computed hospital specific risk-adjusted rates of readmission and number of excess readmissions.
Of the 177,322 patients admitted for traumatic injury 11,940 (6.7%) were readmitted within 30 days. Unadjusted hospital readmission rates for the 637 hospitals in our study varied from 0% to 20%. After controlling for sources of variability the range for hospital readmission rates was between 5.5% and 8.5%. Only 2% of hospitals had a random intercept coefficient significantly different from zero, suggesting that their readmission rates differed from the mean level of all hospitals. We also estimated that in 2014 only 11% of hospitals had more than 2 excess readmissions. Our multilevel model discriminated patients who were readmitted from those not readmitted at an acceptable level (C = 0.74).
We found little evidence that hospitals differ in their readmission rates following an index admission for traumatic injury. There is little justification for penalizing hospitals based on readmissions after traumatic injury.
出院后再入院情况既常见又代价高昂。医院再入院率降低计划(HRRP)会对因某些病症入院后又再入院的医院进行经济处罚,但这种方法可能并不适用于所有病症。我们希望确定各医院在因创伤性损伤首次入院后的调整再入院率是否存在差异。
我们从医疗保健研究与质量局(AHRQ)的国家再入院数据集(NRD)中提取了2014年因创伤性损伤住院的所有非老年成年患者。我们估计了分层逻辑回归模型以预测30天内的再入院情况。模型包括患者层面预测因素、医院层面预测因素或两者都有。我们使用中位数比值比来量化医院再入院情况的差异程度。此外,我们计算了各医院特定的风险调整再入院率和额外再入院次数。
在177,322例因创伤性损伤入院的患者中,11,940例(6.7%)在30天内再次入院。我们研究中的637家医院未经调整的医院再入院率从0%到20%不等。在控制了差异来源后,医院再入院率范围在5.5%至8.5%之间。只有2%的医院其随机截距系数显著不同于零,这表明它们的再入院率与所有医院的平均水平不同。我们还估计在2014年只有11%的医院有超过2次的额外再入院情况。我们的多水平模型在区分再入院患者和未再入院患者方面达到了可接受水平(C = 0.74)。
我们几乎没有发现证据表明各医院在因创伤性损伤首次入院后的再入院率存在差异。基于创伤性损伤后的再入院情况对医院进行处罚几乎没有道理。