Center for Outcomes Research, Houston Methodist, Houston, TX.
Department of Surgery, Houston Methodist, Houston, TX.
Am J Med Qual. 2022;37(4):299-306. doi: 10.1097/JMQ.0000000000000035. Epub 2021 Dec 20.
This study evaluated the utility and performance of the LACE index and HOSPITAL score with consideration of the type of diagnoses and assessed the accuracy of these models for predicting readmission risks in patient cohorts from 2 large academic medical centers. Admissions to 2 hospitals from 2011 to 2015, derived from the Vizient Clinical Data Base and regional health information exchange, were included in this study (291 886 encounters). Models were assessed using Bayesian information criterion and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. They were compared in CMS diagnosis-based cohorts and in 2 non-CMS cancer diagnosis-based cohorts. Overall, both models for readmission risk performed well, with LACE performing slightly better (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve 0.73 versus 0.69; P ≤ 0.001). HOSPITAL consistently outperformed LACE among 4 CMS target diagnoses, lung cancer, and colon cancer. Both LACE and HOSPITAL predict readmission risks well in the overall population, but performance varies by salient, diagnosis-based risk factors.
本研究评估了 LACE 指数和 HOSPITAL 评分的实用性和性能,考虑了诊断类型,并评估了这些模型在预测来自 2 个大型学术医疗中心的患者队列再入院风险方面的准确性。该研究纳入了 2011 年至 2015 年来自 2 家医院的入院数据,这些数据来源于 Vizient 临床数据库和区域健康信息交换。使用贝叶斯信息准则和接收者操作特征曲线下面积评估模型。在 CMS 基于诊断的队列和 2 个非 CMS 癌症诊断队列中对这些模型进行了比较。总体而言,这两种再入院风险模型的性能都很好,LACE 略好(接受者操作特征曲线下面积为 0.73 对 0.69;P ≤ 0.001)。在 4 个 CMS 目标诊断(肺癌和结肠癌)中,HOSPITAL 始终优于 LACE。LACE 和 HOSPITAL 都能很好地预测总体人群的再入院风险,但基于显著诊断风险因素的表现有所不同。