Literature DB >> 20351585

How well do hospital mortality rates reported in the New York State CABG report card predict subsequent hospital performance?

Laurent G Glance1, Andrew W Dick, Dana B Mukamel, Yue Li, Turner M Osler.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The use of mortality report cards as the basis for hospital choice assumes that a hospital's current performance is predicted by its past performance.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of hospital risk-adjusted mortality rates reported in the New York State (NYS) coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) report card for predicting subsequent hospital mortality.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective study based on hospital mortality measures for CABG surgery (n = 37 hospitals) in NYS, which are publicly reported by the NYS Department of Health. Feasible generalized least squares was used to examine the association between a hospital's past quality ranking (high-quality, intermediate-quality, low-quality) and its subsequent performance, as measured using the ratio of the observed-to-expected mortality rate (O-to-E ratio).
RESULTS: Hospitals identified as low-mortality hospitals using 2-year-old data had subsequent O-to-E ratios that were 16.8% lower (95% confidence interval, 8.9-24.8; P < 0.001) than average-mortality hospitals, whereas hospitals identified as high-mortality hospitals had subsequent O-to-E ratios that were 31.8% higher (95% confidence interval, 3.69-59.9; P < 0.05) compared with average-mortality hospitals. Hospitals identified as high-mortality hospitals using 3-year-old data were indistinguishable from average-mortality hospitals.
CONCLUSION: Hospital ranking based on 2-year-old data is a strong predictor of future performance. Report cards based on 3-year-old data may not be useful for identifying low-performance hospitals. We recommend that the CABG report cards in NYS should be based on 2-year-old data, as opposed to the current practice of basing them on either 2- or 3-year-old data.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20351585     DOI: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e3181d568f7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  7 in total

1.  Relevance of Cardiac Surgery Outcome Reporting 3 Years Later in a New York and California Statewide Analysis.

Authors:  Makoto Mori; David M Shahian; Lisa G Suter; Arnar Geirsson; Zhenqiu Lin; Harlan M Krumholz
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2020-05-01       Impact factor: 14.766

2.  Reliability of surgical outcomes for predicting future hospital performance.

Authors:  Robert W Krell; Douglas O Staiger; Justin B Dimick
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.983

3.  Does mandating nursing home participation in quality reporting make a difference? Evidence from Massachusetts.

Authors:  Dana B Mukamel; Zhiqiu Ye; Laurent G Glance; Yue Li
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 2.983

4.  Do past mortality rates predict future hospital mortality?

Authors:  Taylor M Coe; Samuel E Wilson; David C Chang
Journal:  Am J Surg       Date:  2015-05-06       Impact factor: 2.565

5.  Outcomes measures and risk adjustment.

Authors:  Meghan B Lane-Fall; Mark D Neuman
Journal:  Int Anesthesiol Clin       Date:  2013

6.  Quantifying Geographic Variation in Health Care Outcomes in the United States before and after Risk-Adjustment.

Authors:  Barry L Rosenberg; Joshua A Kellar; Anna Labno; David H M Matheson; Michael Ringel; Paige VonAchen; Richard I Lesser; Yue Li; Justin B Dimick; Atul A Gawande; Stefan H Larsson; Hamilton Moses
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-12-14       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Reproducibility of Hospital Rankings Based on Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Hospital Compare Measures as a Function of Measure Reliability.

Authors:  Laurent G Glance; David R Nerenz; Karen E Joynt Maddox; Bruce L Hall; Andrew W Dick
Journal:  JAMA Netw Open       Date:  2021-12-01
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.