T Cooksley1, P W B Nanayakkara2, C H Nickel3, C P Subbe4, J Kellett5, R Kidney6, H Merten2, L Van Galen2, D P Henriksen7, A T Lassen7, M Brabrand. 1. From the Department of Acute Medicine, University Hospital of South Manchester, Manchester, UK, cooks199@hotmail.com. 2. VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 3. University Hospital Basel, Switzerland. 4. Ysbyty Gwynedd Hospital, Wales. 5. Nenagh Hospital, Ireland. 6. St. James' Hospital, Dublin, Ireland and. 7. University of Southern Denmark, Denmark.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are increasingly used as a quality indicator with a belief that they are a marker of poor care and have led to financial penalties in UK and USA. Risk scoring systems, such as LACE and HOSPITAL, have been proposed as tools for identifying patients at high risk of readmission but have not been validated in international populations. AIM: To perform an external independent validation of the HOSPITAL and LACE scores. DESIGN: An unplanned secondary cohort study. METHODS: Patients admitted to the medical admission unit at the Hospital of South West Jutland (10/2008-2/2009; 2/2010-5/2010) and the Odense University Hospital (6/2009-8/2011) were analysed. Validation of the scores using 30 day readmissions as the endpoint was performed. RESULTS: A total of 19 277 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Median age was 67 (range 18-107) years and 8977 (46.6%) were female. The LACE score had a discriminatory power of 0.648 with poor calibration and the HOSPITAL score had a discriminatory power of 0.661 with poor calibration. The HOSPITAL score was significantly better than the LACE score for identifying patients at risk of 30 day readmission (P < 0.001). The discriminatory power of both scores decreased with increasing age. CONCLUSION: Readmissions are a complex phenomenon with not only medical conditions contributing but also system, cultural and environmental factors exerting a significant influence. It is possible that the heterogeneity of the population and health care systems may prohibit the creation of a simple prediction tool that can be used internationally.
BACKGROUND: Hospital readmissions are increasingly used as a quality indicator with a belief that they are a marker of poor care and have led to financial penalties in UK and USA. Risk scoring systems, such as LACE and HOSPITAL, have been proposed as tools for identifying patients at high risk of readmission but have not been validated in international populations. AIM: To perform an external independent validation of the HOSPITAL and LACE scores. DESIGN: An unplanned secondary cohort study. METHODS:Patients admitted to the medical admission unit at the Hospital of South West Jutland (10/2008-2/2009; 2/2010-5/2010) and the Odense University Hospital (6/2009-8/2011) were analysed. Validation of the scores using 30 day readmissions as the endpoint was performed. RESULTS: A total of 19 277 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Median age was 67 (range 18-107) years and 8977 (46.6%) were female. The LACE score had a discriminatory power of 0.648 with poor calibration and the HOSPITAL score had a discriminatory power of 0.661 with poor calibration. The HOSPITAL score was significantly better than the LACE score for identifying patients at risk of 30 day readmission (P < 0.001). The discriminatory power of both scores decreased with increasing age. CONCLUSION: Readmissions are a complex phenomenon with not only medical conditions contributing but also system, cultural and environmental factors exerting a significant influence. It is possible that the heterogeneity of the population and health care systems may prohibit the creation of a simple prediction tool that can be used internationally.
Authors: Joseph R Linzey; Jeffrey L Nadel; D Andrew Wilkinson; Venkatakrishna Rajajee; Badih J Daou; Aditya S Pandey Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Jacques D Donzé; Mark V Williams; Edmondo J Robinson; Eyal Zimlichman; Drahomir Aujesky; Eduard E Vasilevskis; Sunil Kripalani; Joshua P Metlay; Tamara Wallington; Grant S Fletcher; Andrew D Auerbach; Jeffrey L Schnipper Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Stephen L Jones; Ohbet Cheon; Joanna-Grace Mayo Manzano; Anne K Park; Heather Y Lin; Josiah K Halm; Juha Baek; Edward A Graviss; Duc T Nguyen; Bita A Kash; Robert A Phillips Journal: Am J Med Qual Date: 2021-12-20 Impact factor: 1.200
Authors: Lian Leng Low; Kheng Hock Lee; Marcus Eng Hock Ong; Sijia Wang; Shu Yun Tan; Julian Thumboo; Nan Liu Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-11-23 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Hao Wang; Carol Johnson; Richard D Robinson; Vicki A Nejtek; Chet D Schrader; JoAnna Leuck; Johnbosco Umejiego; Allison Trop; Kathleen A Delaney; Nestor R Zenarosa Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2016-10-10 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Lian Leng Low; Nan Liu; Sijia Wang; Julian Thumboo; Marcus Eng Hock Ong; Kheng Hock Lee Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-12-09 Impact factor: 3.240