Justin T Brady1, Bona Ko2, Samuel F Hohmann3,4, Benjamin P Crawshaw1, Jennifer A Leinicke1, Scott R Steele5, Knut M Augestad6,7, Conor P Delaney8. 1. Division of Colorectal Surgery, Department of Surgery, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, 11100 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44106, USA. 2. Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, USA. 3. Center for Advanced Analytics, Vizient, Chicago, IL, USA. 4. Department of Health Systems Management, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA. 5. Department of Colorectal Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 6. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Akershus University Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 7. Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Nordland Hospital Trust, Bodø, Norway. 8. Digestive Disease and Surgery Institute, Cleveland Clinic, 9500 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH, 44195, USA. delanec@ccf.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quality is the major driver for both clinical and financial assessment. There remains a need for simple, affordable, quality metric tools to evaluate patient outcomes, which led us to develop the HospitAl length of stay, Readmission and Mortality (HARM) score. We hypothesized that the HARM score would be a reliable tool to assess patient outcomes across various surgical specialties. METHODS: From 2011 to 2015, we identified colorectal, hepatobiliary, upper gastrointestinal, and hernia surgery admissions using the Vizient Clinical Database. Individual and hospital HARM scores were calculated from length of stay, 30-day readmission, and mortality rates. We evaluated the correlation of HARM scores with complication rates using the Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS: We identified 525,083 surgical patients: 206,981 colorectal, 164,691 hepatobiliary, 97,157 hernia, and 56,254 upper gastrointestinal. Overall, 53.8% of patients were admitted electively with a mean HARM score of 2.24; 46.2% were admitted emergently with a mean HARM score of 1.45 (p < 0.0001). All HARM components correlated with patient complications on logistic regression (p < 0.0001). The mean length of stay increased from 3.2 ± 1.8 days for a HARM score < 2 to 15.1 ± 12.2 days for a HARM score > 4 (p < 0.001). In elective admissions, for HARM categories of < 2, 2-< 3, 3-4, and > 4, complication rates were 9.3, 23.2, 38.8, and 71.6%, respectively. There was a similar trend for increasing HARM score in emergent admissions as well. For all surgical procedure categories, increasing HARM score, with and without risk adjustment, correlated with increasing severity of complications by Clavien-Dindo classification. CONCLUSIONS: The HARM score is an easy-to-use quality metric that correlates with increasing complication rates and complication severity across multiple surgical disciplines when evaluated on a large administrative database. This inexpensive tool could be adopted across multiple institutions to compare the quality of surgical care.
BACKGROUND: Quality is the major driver for both clinical and financial assessment. There remains a need for simple, affordable, quality metric tools to evaluate patient outcomes, which led us to develop the HospitAl length of stay, Readmission and Mortality (HARM) score. We hypothesized that the HARM score would be a reliable tool to assess patient outcomes across various surgical specialties. METHODS: From 2011 to 2015, we identified colorectal, hepatobiliary, upper gastrointestinal, and hernia surgery admissions using the Vizient Clinical Database. Individual and hospital HARM scores were calculated from length of stay, 30-day readmission, and mortality rates. We evaluated the correlation of HARM scores with complication rates using the Clavien-Dindo classification. RESULTS: We identified 525,083 surgical patients: 206,981 colorectal, 164,691 hepatobiliary, 97,157 hernia, and 56,254 upper gastrointestinal. Overall, 53.8% of patients were admitted electively with a mean HARM score of 2.24; 46.2% were admitted emergently with a mean HARM score of 1.45 (p < 0.0001). All HARM components correlated with patient complications on logistic regression (p < 0.0001). The mean length of stay increased from 3.2 ± 1.8 days for a HARM score < 2 to 15.1 ± 12.2 days for a HARM score > 4 (p < 0.001). In elective admissions, for HARM categories of < 2, 2-< 3, 3-4, and > 4, complication rates were 9.3, 23.2, 38.8, and 71.6%, respectively. There was a similar trend for increasing HARM score in emergent admissions as well. For all surgical procedure categories, increasing HARM score, with and without risk adjustment, correlated with increasing severity of complications by Clavien-Dindo classification. CONCLUSIONS: The HARM score is an easy-to-use quality metric that correlates with increasing complication rates and complication severity across multiple surgical disciplines when evaluated on a large administrative database. This inexpensive tool could be adopted across multiple institutions to compare the quality of surgical care.
Authors: Adrian T Billeter; Hiram C Polk; Samuel F Hohmann; Motaz Qadan; Donald E Fry; Jeffrey R Jorden; Michael H McCafferty; Susan Galandiuk Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2012-03-06 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Charles E Edmiston; Maureen Spencer; Brian D Lewis; Kellie R Brown; Peter J Rossi; Cindy R Henen; Heidi W Smith; Gary R Seabrook Journal: Surg Infect (Larchmt) Date: 2011-07-18 Impact factor: 2.150
Authors: Gregory C Wilson; R Cutler Quillin; Jeffrey M Sutton; Koffi Wima; Joshua J Shaw; Richard S Hoehn; Ian M Paquette; Daniel E Abbott; Shimul A Shah Journal: Dig Dis Sci Date: 2014-07-27 Impact factor: 3.199
Authors: Jonah J Stulberg; Conor P Delaney; Duncan V Neuhauser; David C Aron; Pingfu Fu; Siran M Koroukian Journal: JAMA Date: 2010-06-23 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nadia A Khan; Hude Quan; Jennifer M Bugar; Jane B Lemaire; Rollin Brant; William A Ghali Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2006-02 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Gregory C Wilson; Richard S Hoehn; Audrey E Ertel; Koffi Wima; R Cutler Quillin; Sam Hohmann; Flavio Paterno; Daniel E Abbott; Shimul A Shah Journal: Liver Transpl Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 5.799
Authors: Justin B Dimick; Nancy J Birkmeyer; Jonathan F Finks; David A Share; Wayne J English; Arthur M Carlin; John D Birkmeyer Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2014-01 Impact factor: 14.766