Literature DB >> 21156880

Impact of independent data adjudication on hospital-specific estimates of risk-adjusted mortality following percutaneous coronary interventions in massachusetts.

Kurt G Barringhaus1, Katya Zelevinsky, Ann Lovett, Sharon-Lise T Normand, Kalon K L Ho.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: As part of state-mandated public reporting of outcomes after percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) in Massachusetts, procedural and clinical data were prospectively collected. Variables associated with higher mortality were audited to ensure accuracy of coding. We examined the impact of adjudication on identifying hospitals with possible deficiencies in the quality of PCI care. METHODS AND
RESULTS: From October 2005 to September 2006, 15 721 admissions for PCI occurred in 21 hospitals. Of the 864 high-risk variables from 822 patients audited by committee, 201 were changed, with reassignment to lower acuities in 97 (30%) of the 321 shock cases, 24 (43%) of the 56 salvage cases, and 73 (15%) of the 478 emergent cases. Logistic regression models were used to predict patient-specific in-hospital mortality. Of 241 (1.5%) patients who died after PCI, 30 (12.4%) had a lower predicted mortality with adjudicated than with unadjudicated data. Model accuracy was excellent with either adjudicated or unadjudicated data. Hospital-specific risk-standardized mortality rates were estimated using both adjudicated and unadjudicated data through hierarchical logistic regression. Although adjudication reduced between-hospital variation by one third, risk-standardized mortality rates were similar using unadjudicated and adjudicated data. None of the hospitals were identified as statistical outliers. However, cross-validated posterior-predicted P values calculated with adjudicated data increased the number of borderline hospital outliers compared with unadjudicated data.
CONCLUSIONS: Independent adjudication of site-reported high-risk features may increase the ability to identify hospitals with higher risk-adjusted mortality after PCI despite having little impact on the accuracy of risk prediction for the entire population.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21156880     DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.110.957597

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes        ISSN: 1941-7713


  10 in total

Review 1.  Public reporting of PCI outcomes: for better or for worse.

Authors:  Brian J Potter; Robert W Yeh; Duane S Pinto
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.931

Review 2.  Public Reporting of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Outcomes: Moving Beyond the Status Quo.

Authors:  Rishi K Wadhera; Karen E Joynt Maddox; Robert W Yeh; Deepak L Bhatt
Journal:  JAMA Cardiol       Date:  2018-07-01       Impact factor: 14.676

3.  Inadequate Surrogates for Imperfect Quality Measures.

Authors:  Rishi K Wadhera; Robert W Yeh
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 6.546

Review 4.  Risk assessment methods for cardiac surgery and intervention.

Authors:  Nassir M Thalji; Rakesh M Suri; Kevin L Greason; Hartzell V Schaff
Journal:  Nat Rev Cardiol       Date:  2014-09-23       Impact factor: 32.419

5.  The National Cardiovascular Data Registry Voluntary Public Reporting Program: An Interim Report From the NCDR Public Reporting Advisory Group.

Authors:  Gregory J Dehmer; Jonathan Jennings; Ruth A Madden; David J Malenka; Frederick A Masoudi; Charles R McKay; Debra L Ness; Sunil V Rao; Frederic S Resnic; Michael E Ring; John S Rumsfeld; Marc E Shelton; Michael C Simanowith; Lara E Slattery; William S Weintraub; Ann Lovett; Sharon-Lise Normand
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 24.094

6.  Taking the "Public" Out of Public Reporting of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention.

Authors:  Rishi K Wadhera; Deepak L Bhatt
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2017-10-17       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Incidence and predictors of 30-day hospital readmission rate following percutaneous coronary intervention (from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Dynamic Registry).

Authors:  Mark J Ricciardi; Faith Selzer; Oscar C Marroquin; Elizabeth M Holper; Lakshmi Venkitachalam; David O Williams; Sheryl F Kelsey; Warren K Laskey
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 2.778

8.  Risk Prediction in Clinical Practice: A Practical Guide for Cardiothoracic Surgeons.

Authors:  Amelia Maiga; Farhood Farjah; Jeffrey Blume; Stephen Deppen; Valerie F Welty; Richard S D'Agostino; Graham A Colditz; Benjamin D Kozower; Eric L Grogan
Journal:  Ann Thorac Surg       Date:  2019-06-27       Impact factor: 4.330

9.  Effect of Public Reporting on the Utilization of Coronary Angiography After Out-of-Hospital Cardiac Arrest.

Authors:  Ashwin S Nathan; Rohan M Shah; Sameed A Khatana; Elias Dayoub; Paula Chatterjee; Nimesh D Desai; Stephen W Waldo; Robert W Yeh; Peter W Groeneveld; Jay Giri
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 7.514

10.  The inter-rater reliability of the diagnosis of surgical site infection in the context of a clinical trial.

Authors:  J Nuttall; N Evaniew; P Thornley; A Griffin; B Deheshi; T O'Shea; J Wunder; P Ferguson; R L Randall; R Turcotte; P Schneider; P McKay; M Bhandari; M Ghert
Journal:  Bone Joint Res       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 5.853

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.