Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America; CRISMA Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America; UPMC Health System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America.
Division of Pulmonary, Allergy, and Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America; CRISMA Center, Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America; UPMC Health System, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America; Department of Health Policy & Management, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America.
J Crit Care. 2019 Dec;54:88-93. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2019.08.009. Epub 2019 Aug 5.
Newly enacted policies at the state and federal level in the United States require acute care hospitals to engage in sepsis quality improvement. However, responding to these policies requires considerable resources and may disproportionately burden safety-net hospitals. To better understand this issue, we analyzed the relationship between hospital safety-net status and performance on Medicare's SEP-1 quality measure.
We linked multiple publicly-available datasets with information on SEP-1 performance, structural hospital characteristics, hospital financial case mix, and health system affiliation. We analyzed the relationship between hospital safety-net status and SEP-1 performance, as well as whether hospital characteristics moderated that relationship.
We analyzed data from 2827 hospitals, defining safety-net hospitals using financial case mix data. The 703 safety-net hospitals performed worse on Medicare's SEP-1 quality measure (adjusted difference 2.3% compliance, 95% CI -4.0%--0.6%). This association was most evident in hospitals not affiliated with health systems, in which the difference between safety-net and non-safety-net hospitals was 6.8% compliance (95% CI -10.4%--3.3%).
Existing sepsis policies may harm safety-net hospitals and widen health disparities. Our findings suggest that strategies to promote collaboration among hospitals may be an avenue for sepsis performance improvement in safety-net hospitals.
美国州和联邦层面新颁布的政策要求急性护理医院参与脓毒症质量改进。然而,应对这些政策需要相当多的资源,并且可能会不成比例地给安全网医院带来负担。为了更好地了解这个问题,我们分析了医院安全网状况与医疗保险 SEP-1 质量衡量标准之间的关系。
我们将多个公开可用的数据集与 SEP-1 绩效、结构医院特征、医院财务病例组合和卫生系统隶属关系的信息联系起来。我们分析了医院安全网状况与 SEP-1 绩效之间的关系,以及医院特征是否调节了这种关系。
我们分析了来自 2827 家医院的数据,使用财务病例组合数据来定义安全网医院。703 家安全网医院在医疗保险 SEP-1 质量衡量标准上的表现较差(调整差异合规率为 2.3%,95%CI-4.0%--0.6%)。这种关联在未与卫生系统相关联的医院中最为明显,安全网医院和非安全网医院之间的差异为 6.8%的合规率(95%CI-10.4%--3.3%)。
现有的脓毒症政策可能会伤害安全网医院并扩大健康差距。我们的研究结果表明,促进医院之间合作的策略可能是提高安全网医院脓毒症绩效的一个途径。