Literature DB >> 31389897

Patient-related Factors and Perioperative Outcomes Are Associated with Self-Reported Hospital Rating after Spine Surgery.

Elbert J Mets1, Michael R Mercier1, Ari S Hilibrand1, Michelle C Scott1,2, Arya G Varthi1, Jonathan N Grauer1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Since 2013, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has tied a portion of hospitals' annual reimbursement to patients' responses to the Hospital Consumer Assessment and Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey, which is given to a random sample of inpatients after discharge. The most general question in the HCAHPS survey asks patients to rate their overall hospital experience on a scale of 0 to 10, with a score of 9 or 10 considered high, or "top-box." Previous work has suggested that HCAHPS responses, which are meant to be an objective measure of the quality of care delivered, may vary based on numerous patient factors. However, few studies to date have identified factors associated with HCAHPS scores among patients undergoing spine surgery, and those that have are largely restricted to surgery of the lumbar spine. Consequently, patient and perioperative factors associated with HCAHPS scores among patients receiving surgery across the spine have not been well elucidated. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: Among patients undergoing spine surgery, we asked if a "top-box" rating on the overall hospital experience question on the HCAHPS survey was associated with (1) patient-related factors present before admission; (2) surgical variables related to the procedure; and/or (3) 30-day perioperative outcomes.
METHODS: Among 5517 patients undergoing spine surgery at a single academic institution from 2013 to 2017 and who were sent an HCAHPS survey, 27% (1480) returned the survey and answered the question related to overall hospital experience. A retrospective, comparative analysis was performed comparing patients who rated their overall hospital experience as "top-box" with those who did not. Patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical variables, and perioperative outcomes were compared between the groups. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to determine patient demographics, comorbidities, and surgical variables associated with a top-box hospital rating. Additional multivariate logistic regression analyses controlling for these variables were performed to determine the association of any adverse event, major adverse events (such as myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism), and minor adverse events (such as urinary tract infection, pneumonia); reoperation; readmission; and prolonged hospitalization with a top-box hospital rating.
RESULTS: After controlling for potential confounding variables (including patient demographics), comorbidities that differed in incidence between patients who rated the hospital top-box and those who did not, and variables related to surgery, the patient factors associated with a top-box hospital rating were older age (compared with age ≤ 40 years; odds ratio 2.2, [95% confidence interval 1.4 to 3.4]; p = 0.001 for 41 to 60 years; OR 2.5 [95% CI 1.6 to 3.9]; p < 0.001 for 61 to 80 years; OR 2.1 [95% CI 1.1 to 4.1]; p = 0.036 for > 80 years), and being a man (OR 1.3 [95% CI 1.0 to 1.7]; p = 0.028). Further, a non-top-box hospital rating was associated with American Society of Anesthesiologists Class II (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 to 0.9]; p = 0.024), Class III (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 to 0.9]; p = 0.020), or Class IV (OR 0.2 [95% CI 0.1 to 0.5]; p = 0.003). The only surgical factor positively associated with a top-box hospital rating was cervical surgery (compared with lumbar surgery; OR 1.4 [95% CI 1.1 to 1.9]; p = 0.016), while nonelective surgery (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 to 0.8]; p = 0.004) was associated with a non-top-box hospital rating. Controlling for the same set of variables, a non-top-box rating was associated with the occurrence of any adverse event (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 to 0.7]; p < 0.001), readmission (OR 0.5 [95% CI 0.3 to 0.9]; p = 0.023), and prolonged hospital stay (OR, 0.6 [95% CI 0.4 to 0.8]; p = 0.004).
CONCLUSIONS: Identifying patient factors present before surgery that are independently associated with HCAHPS scores underscores the survey's limited utility in accurately measuring the quality of care delivered to patients undergoing spine surgery. HCAHPS responses in the spine surgery population should be interpreted with caution and should consider the factors identified here. Given differing findings in the literature regarding the effect of adverse events on HCAHPS scores, future work should aim to further characterize this relationship. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 31389897      PMCID: PMC7145058          DOI: 10.1097/CORR.0000000000000892

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res        ISSN: 0009-921X            Impact factor:   4.755


  47 in total

1.  American College of Surgeons Level I trauma centers outcomes do not correlate with patients' perception of hospital experience.

Authors:  Bellal Joseph; Asad Azim; Terence O'Keeffe; Kareem Ibraheem; Narong Kulvatunyou; Andrew Tang; Gary Vercruysse; Randall Friese; Rifat Latifi; Peter Rhee
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.313

2.  Achieving a 5-star rating: Analysis of Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) scores among patients undergoing elective colorectal operations.

Authors:  Cornelius A Thiels; Kristine T Hanson; Kathleen J Yost; Kellie L Mathis; Robert R Cima; Martin D Zielinski; Elizabeth B Habermann
Journal:  Surgery       Date:  2016-07-27       Impact factor: 3.982

3.  Predicting Inpatient Dissatisfaction Following Total Joint Arthroplasty: An Analysis of 3,593 Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Survey Responses.

Authors:  Tyler J Vovos; Sean P Ryan; Cierra S Hong; Claire B Howell; Thomas J Risoli; David E Attarian; Thorsten M Seyler
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  2019-01-11       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  HCAHPS Survey Results: Impact of Severity of Illness on Hospitals' Performance on HCAHPS Survey Results.

Authors:  James I Merlino; Carmen Kestranek; Daniel Bokar; Zhiyuan Sun; Steven E Nissen; David L Longworth
Journal:  J Patient Exp       Date:  2014-11-01

5.  The impact of spine disease, relative to cranial disease, on perception of health and care experience: an analysis of 1484 patients in a tertiary center.

Authors:  Panagiotis Kerezoudis; Mohammed Ali Alvi; Daniel S Ubl; Kristine T Hanson; William E Krauss; Fredric B Meyer; Robert J Spinner; Elizabeth B Habermann; Mohamad Bydon
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  2018-12-01       Impact factor: 5.115

6.  Patients' perceptions of care are associated with quality of hospital care: a survey of 4605 hospitals.

Authors:  Spencer M Stein; Michael Day; Raj Karia; Lorraine Hutzler; Joseph A Bosco
Journal:  Am J Med Qual       Date:  2014-04-16       Impact factor: 1.852

7.  Patient-reported Allergies are Associated With Preoperative Psychological Distress and Less Satisfying Patient Experience in a Lumbar Spine Surgery Population.

Authors:  Jay M Levin; Spencer Boyle; Robert D Winkelman; Joseph E Tanenbaum; Kalil G Abdullah; Michael P Steinmetz; Thomas E Mroz
Journal:  Clin Spine Surg       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 1.876

8.  Patients' perspectives of care and surgical outcomes in Michigan: an analysis using the CAHPS hospital survey.

Authors:  Kyle H Sheetz; Seth A Waits; Micah E Girotti; Darrell A Campbell; Michael J Englesbe
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Patient Race and Provider Predict Patient Satisfaction Following Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Ashkaun Shaterian; Jessica Gandy; Shadi Lalezari; Sarah Smith; Keyianoosh Paydar
Journal:  World J Plast Surg       Date:  2016-05

10.  At the Intersection of Patient Experience Data, Outcomes Research, and Practice: Analysis of HCAHPS Scores in Neurology Patients.

Authors:  Kristine T Hanson; Nicholas L Zalewski; Sara E Hocker; Richard J Caselli; Elizabeth B Habermann; Cornelius A Thiels
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc Innov Qual Outcomes       Date:  2018-05-24
View more
  3 in total

1.  Predictors of Patient Satisfaction in Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Brandon M Lehrich; Khodayar Goshtasbi; Nolan J Brown; Shane Shahrestani; Brian V Lien; Seth C Ransom; Ali R Tafreshi; Ryan C Ransom; Alvin Y Chan; Luis D Diaz-Aguilar; Ronald Sahyouni; Martin H Pham; Joseph A Osorio; Michael Y Oh
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2020-11-28       Impact factor: 2.104

2.  Correlation of Patient Reported Satisfaction With Adverse Events Following Elective Posterior Lumbar Fusion Surgery: A Single Institution Analysis.

Authors:  Michael R Mercier; Anoop R Galivanche; Ryan McLean; Alexander J Kammien; Courtney S Toombs; Daniel R Rubio; Arya G Varthi; Jonathan N Grauer
Journal:  N Am Spine Soc J       Date:  2022-08-13

3.  Postoperative Physical Therapy Program Focused on Low Back Pain Can Improve Treatment Satisfaction after Minimally Invasive Lumbar Decompression.

Authors:  Hidetomi Terai; Koji Tamai; Kunikazu Kaneda; Toshimitsu Omine; Hiroshi Katsuda; Nagakazu Shimada; Yuto Kobayashi; Hiroaki Nakamura
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-09-22       Impact factor: 4.964

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.